THE GUARDIAN
"Capitol attack panel investigates Trump over potential criminal conspiracy"
Hugo Lowell in Washington
8 JANUARY 2022
The House select committee investigating the Capitol attack is examining whether Donald Trump oversaw a criminal conspiracy on 6 January that connected the White House’s scheme to stop Joe Biden’s certification with the insurrection, say two senior sources familiar with the matter.
The committee’s new focus on the potential for a conspiracy marks an aggressive escalation in its inquiry as it confronts evidence that suggests the former president potentially engaged in criminal conduct egregious enough to warrant a referral to the justice department.
House investigators are interested in whether Trump oversaw a criminal conspiracy after communications turned over by Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows and others suggested the White House coordinated efforts to stop Biden’s certification, the sources said.
The select committee has several thousand messages, among which include some that suggest the Trump White House briefed a number of House Republicans on its plan for then-vice president Mike Pence to abuse his ceremonial role and not certify Biden’s win, the sources said.
The fact that the select committee has messages suggesting the Trump White House directed Republican members of Congress to execute a scheme to stop Biden’s certification is significant as it could give rise to the panel considering referrals for potential crimes, the sources said.
Members and counsel on the select committee are examining in the first instance whether in seeking to stop the certification, Trump and his aides violated the federal law that prohibits obstruction of a congressional proceeding – the joint session on 6 January – the sources said.
The select committee believes, the sources said, that Trump may be culpable for an obstruction charge given he failed for hours to intervene to stop the violence at the Capitol perpetrated by his supporters in his name.
But the select committee is also looking at whether Trump oversaw an unlawful conspiracy that involved coordination between the “political elements” of the White House plan communicated to Republican lawmakers and extremist groups that stormed the Capitol, the sources said.
That would probably be the most serious charge for which the select committee might consider a referral, as it considers a range of other criminal conduct that has emerged in recent weeks from obstruction to potential wire fraud by the GOP.
The vice-chair of the select committee, the Republican congresswoman Liz Cheney, referenced the obstruction charge when she read from the criminal code before members voted unanimously last November to recommend Meadows in contempt of Congress for refusing to testify.
The Guardian previously reported that Trump personally directed lawyers and political operatives working from the Willard hotel in Washington DC to find ways to stop Biden’s certification from happening at all on 6 January just hours before the Capitol attack.
But House investigators are yet to find evidence tying Trump personally to the Capitol attack, the sources said, and may ultimately only recommend referrals for the straight obstruction charge, which has already been brought against around 275 rioters, rather than for conspiracy.
The justice department could yet charge Trump and aides separate to the select committee investigation, but one of sources said the panel – as of mid-December – had no idea whether the agency is actively examining potential criminality by the former president.
A spokesperson for the select committee declined to comment on details about the investigation.
A spokesperson for the justice department declined to comment whether the agency had opened a criminal inquiry for Trump or his closest allies over 6 January.
Still, the select committee appears to be moving towards making at least some referrals – or alternatively recommendations in its final report – that an aggressive prosecutor at the justice department could use to pursue a criminal inquiry, the sources said.
The select committee is examining the evidence principally to identify legislative reforms to prevent a repeat of Trump’s plan to subvert the election, but members say if they find Trump violated federal law, they have an obligation to refer that to the justice department.
Sending a criminal referral to the justice department – essentially a recommendation for prosecution – carries no formal legal weight since Congress lacks the authority to force it to open a case, and House investigators have no authority to charge witnesses with a crime.
But a credible criminal referral from the select committee could have a substantial political effect given the importance of the 6 January inquiry, and place pressure on the attorney general, Merrick Garland, to initiate an investigation, or explain why he might not do so.
Internal discussions about criminal referrals intensified after communications turned over by Meadows revealed alarming lines of communication between the Trump White House and Republican lawmakers over 6 January, the sources said.
In one exchange released by the select committee, one Republican lawmaker texted Meadows an apology for not pulling off what might have amounted to a coup, saying 6 January was a “terrible day” not because of the attack, but because they were unable to stop Biden’s certification.
The select committee believes messages such as that text – as well as remarks from a Republican on the House floor as the Capitol came under attack – might represent one part of a conspiracy by the White House to obstruct the joint session, the sources said.
In referencing objections to six states, the text also appears to comport with a memo authored by the Trump lawyer John Eastman that suggested lodging objections to six states – raising the specter the White House distributed the plan more widely than previously known.
Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the select committee, added on ABC last week that the investigation had found evidence to suggest the events of 6 January “appeared to be a coordinated effort on the part of a number of people to undermine the election”.
Counsel for the select committee indicated in their contempt of Congress report for Meadows that they intended to ask Trump’s former chief of staff about those communications he turned over voluntarily, before he broke off a cooperation deal and refused to testify.
Thompson has also suggested to reporters that he believes Meadows stopped cooperating with the inquiry in part because of pressure from Trump, but the select committee has not opened a separate witness intimidation investigation into the former president, one of the sources said.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... hp&pc=U531
AMERICA'S FIGHTING BULLDOG JOE BIDEN
Re: AMERICA'S FIGHTING BULLDOG JOE BIDEN
SALON
"Democrats quietly consider using 14th Amendment to prevent Trump from running for office in 2024"
Brett Bachman
7 JANUARY 2022
Congressional Democrats are eyeing a little-known constitutional mechanism to prevent former President Donald Trump from running for office again, citing his responsibility for the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and subsequent attacks on American democracy.
According to a new report in The Hill, at least a dozen Democratic lawmakers have been quietly speaking, both publicly and privately, about whether or not it would be possible to use Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to permanently ban Trump — or anyone else who participated in the planning or execution of the Jan. 6 Capitol attack — from seeking elected office in the future.
The post-Civil War clause bars anyone who has engaged in "insurrection or rebellion" against the United States from seeking public office, and reads:
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."
"But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
The theory gained credence in the days following the Capitol riot, but quickly fell by the wayside with the hope that Trump would eventually accept his election loss and disavow the violence of Jan. 6.
With the one-year anniversary of the attacks now passed, and Trump's false claims of a "stolen" election still at a fever pitch, it appears the idea is once again being discussed on Capitol Hill.
"If anything, the idea has waxed and waned," said Laurence Tribe, a constitutional expert at Harvard Law School who has spoken previously about the 14th Amendment.
"I hear it being raised with considerable frequency these days both by media commentators and by members of Congress and their staffs, some of whom have sought my advice on how to implement Section 3."
He shared with The Hill the names of several lawmakers who have reached out in recent weeks for counsel on gaming out exactly how such a controversial tactic might be used.
Those include Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the House select committee investigating Jan. 6; Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee; and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., who told the outlet: "I continue to explore all legal paths to ensure that the people who tried to subvert our democracy are not in charge of it."
Neither of the other two Democrats spoke with The Hill about their inquiries, though Raskin gave an interview last February in which he expressed his support for the premise.
"The point is that the constitutional purpose is clear, to keep people exactly like Donald Trump and other traitors to the union from holding public office," he told ABC News, adding that he planned to conduct "more research" on the matter before pursuing it.
It's unclear exactly how the implementation of such a provision might work — it would likely be the first time in well over a century that Section 3 has been discussed in Congress, after the body waived enforcement of the clause for Confederate officials and some Ku Klux Klan members as a way to promote national unity during the Reconstruction era.
Constitutional scholars are split over how execution of the rule would work, with one group arguing that a simple majority vote in both chambers of Congress that found Trump guilty of fomenting the insurrection would be enough to bar him from holding future public office.
Others, including Tribe, say that a "neutral" fact-finding body would have to determine whether Trump officially engaged in an "insurrection" or "rebellion" — a task for either a Congressional panel or federal court.
A separate stand-alone law proposed last year by Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., would give the U.S. Attorney General the power to argue that same case in front of a three-judge panel, though the bill itself has received little support thus far.
Liberal elections groups, such as "Free Speech For People," have even been making the case that state-level election officials could use Section 3 on a state-by-state basis to take Trump's name off their ballots if he were to run again in 2024.
All of these implementations would, however, face a major hurdle at the U.S. Supreme Court, which maintains a conservative majority after Trump appointed three justices to the bench during his four years in office.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... d=msedgntp
"Democrats quietly consider using 14th Amendment to prevent Trump from running for office in 2024"
Brett Bachman
7 JANUARY 2022
Congressional Democrats are eyeing a little-known constitutional mechanism to prevent former President Donald Trump from running for office again, citing his responsibility for the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and subsequent attacks on American democracy.
According to a new report in The Hill, at least a dozen Democratic lawmakers have been quietly speaking, both publicly and privately, about whether or not it would be possible to use Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to permanently ban Trump — or anyone else who participated in the planning or execution of the Jan. 6 Capitol attack — from seeking elected office in the future.
The post-Civil War clause bars anyone who has engaged in "insurrection or rebellion" against the United States from seeking public office, and reads:
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."
"But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
The theory gained credence in the days following the Capitol riot, but quickly fell by the wayside with the hope that Trump would eventually accept his election loss and disavow the violence of Jan. 6.
With the one-year anniversary of the attacks now passed, and Trump's false claims of a "stolen" election still at a fever pitch, it appears the idea is once again being discussed on Capitol Hill.
"If anything, the idea has waxed and waned," said Laurence Tribe, a constitutional expert at Harvard Law School who has spoken previously about the 14th Amendment.
"I hear it being raised with considerable frequency these days both by media commentators and by members of Congress and their staffs, some of whom have sought my advice on how to implement Section 3."
He shared with The Hill the names of several lawmakers who have reached out in recent weeks for counsel on gaming out exactly how such a controversial tactic might be used.
Those include Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the House select committee investigating Jan. 6; Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee; and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., who told the outlet: "I continue to explore all legal paths to ensure that the people who tried to subvert our democracy are not in charge of it."
Neither of the other two Democrats spoke with The Hill about their inquiries, though Raskin gave an interview last February in which he expressed his support for the premise.
"The point is that the constitutional purpose is clear, to keep people exactly like Donald Trump and other traitors to the union from holding public office," he told ABC News, adding that he planned to conduct "more research" on the matter before pursuing it.
It's unclear exactly how the implementation of such a provision might work — it would likely be the first time in well over a century that Section 3 has been discussed in Congress, after the body waived enforcement of the clause for Confederate officials and some Ku Klux Klan members as a way to promote national unity during the Reconstruction era.
Constitutional scholars are split over how execution of the rule would work, with one group arguing that a simple majority vote in both chambers of Congress that found Trump guilty of fomenting the insurrection would be enough to bar him from holding future public office.
Others, including Tribe, say that a "neutral" fact-finding body would have to determine whether Trump officially engaged in an "insurrection" or "rebellion" — a task for either a Congressional panel or federal court.
A separate stand-alone law proposed last year by Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., would give the U.S. Attorney General the power to argue that same case in front of a three-judge panel, though the bill itself has received little support thus far.
Liberal elections groups, such as "Free Speech For People," have even been making the case that state-level election officials could use Section 3 on a state-by-state basis to take Trump's name off their ballots if he were to run again in 2024.
All of these implementations would, however, face a major hurdle at the U.S. Supreme Court, which maintains a conservative majority after Trump appointed three justices to the bench during his four years in office.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... d=msedgntp
Re: AMERICA'S FIGHTING BULLDOG JOE BIDEN
REUTERS
"First months of 2022 crucial for Biden agenda as November midterms loom"
By Jarrett Renshaw and Trevor Hunnicutt
January 10, 2022
WASHINGTON, Jan 10 (Reuters) - U.S. President Joe Biden has three years left in office, but some of his domestic agenda may have a much shorter clock.
The White House has a small window of time to pass any meaningful laws in 2022, including the 'Build Back Better' plan, Biden allies tell Reuters, before Congress shifts its attention to the November midterm elections.
If Democrats in swing districts get cold feet about passing sweeping legislation as voting gets closer, the $2 trillion landmark bill that funds universal preschool and climate initiatives could be derailed entirely.
Democrats believe chances are slim they will retain a narrow majority in both houses of Congress, which allowed them to pass the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill in 2021.
All 435 members of the House are up for reelection in 2022, and one-third of the U.S. Senate, including Democrats in competitive districts in Arizona, Georgia and Nevada.
"History has shown that lawmakers are risk averse during the mid term," says Phil Schiliro, who served as legislative affairs director under former president Barack Obama.
"Some have felt they have taken enough difficult votes and they want to focus on reelection," Schiliro says.
What that means is "the first few months, from a legislative perspective, could be the last-best chance for this administration to get anything done," said a Biden ally.
Some congressional aides and White House allies are holding out faint hope that Biden can renew discussions with U.S. Senate Democrat Joe Manchin, a conservative Democrat from West Virginia, and pass key aspects of the Build Back Better plan.
White House officials say there has been no sign of progress with Manchin since he said he wouldn't back the current bill in mid-December, even on a plan Manchin told Biden he could support just a month ago.
"If it doesn’t happen in the first quarter, we are cooked," said a Democratic legislative aide involved in the discussions, referring to the first three months of 2022.
VOTING RIGHTS DILEMMA
The White House is expected to detail its midterm strategy in the upcoming weeks, including more aggressive attacks against acolytes of former President Donald Trump.
The strategy includes heavy investment of time and money in competitive elections in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia and Arizona - all states also considered crucial to retaining the White House in 2024, according to three sources familiar with the plan.
With few potential legislative options, the White House is expected to continue to make fighting COVID and inflation a priority as Biden and other officials tour the country selling the benefits of a $1 trillion infrastructure law passed in November.
That includes leaning into more grassroots liberal issues like voting and abortion rights and gun control.
While the issues may energize Democratic voters, the path forward for new laws is unclear.
Republicans blocked multiple attempts to pass voting-rights reform bills last year, leaving top Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer threatening to make changes to the "filibuster" rule, which requires 60 of the 100 senators to agree on most legislation.
Democrats Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema oppose changes, saying they would damage the way the Senate operates.
While other Democrats lean on the duo to change their views, top Senate Republican suggested another approach - changing the 1887 Electoral Count Act, which allows members of Congress to dispute presidential election results when they certify them on January 6th.
After the attack on Congress by Trump supporters on Jan. 6 of 2021, experts fear the process could be at the center of a constitutional crisis over future elections.
"I think it's worth discussing," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters, without providing specifics of what he would change.
Democrats say his suggestion is insufficient because it doesn't include plans to expand access to ballots or remove new barriers being erected by Republican-controlled states.
Biden is expected to publicly demand changes to the filibuster rule to pass voting rights legislation as soon as Tuesday, when he and Vice President Kamala Harris visit Georgia to make a push for voting rights, and make the case that he exhausted options on an issue that his base cares deeply about.
Civil rights groups are asking for more.
"Many policy makers, including in the White House, did not prioritize this issue early enough," Derrick Johnson, president of the NAACP told Reuters, adding the group plans on "doubling down" on efforts to pressure Congress and the White House to act.
However, he said it may be too late.
Johnson said the lack of action has the left the country in a "precarious situation" that allowed Republicans to redraw congressional districts, particularly in southern states, without any federal protections against disparate impacts to black voters.
"In addition to that, we're looking at a midterm elections where many voices will be hampered from truly participating in the election," Johnson said.
Reporting By Jarrett Renshaw, Trevor Hunnicutt and Richard Cowan in Washington; Editing by Heather Timmons and Diane Craft
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/first- ... 022-01-10/
"First months of 2022 crucial for Biden agenda as November midterms loom"
By Jarrett Renshaw and Trevor Hunnicutt
January 10, 2022
WASHINGTON, Jan 10 (Reuters) - U.S. President Joe Biden has three years left in office, but some of his domestic agenda may have a much shorter clock.
The White House has a small window of time to pass any meaningful laws in 2022, including the 'Build Back Better' plan, Biden allies tell Reuters, before Congress shifts its attention to the November midterm elections.
If Democrats in swing districts get cold feet about passing sweeping legislation as voting gets closer, the $2 trillion landmark bill that funds universal preschool and climate initiatives could be derailed entirely.
Democrats believe chances are slim they will retain a narrow majority in both houses of Congress, which allowed them to pass the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill in 2021.
All 435 members of the House are up for reelection in 2022, and one-third of the U.S. Senate, including Democrats in competitive districts in Arizona, Georgia and Nevada.
"History has shown that lawmakers are risk averse during the mid term," says Phil Schiliro, who served as legislative affairs director under former president Barack Obama.
"Some have felt they have taken enough difficult votes and they want to focus on reelection," Schiliro says.
What that means is "the first few months, from a legislative perspective, could be the last-best chance for this administration to get anything done," said a Biden ally.
Some congressional aides and White House allies are holding out faint hope that Biden can renew discussions with U.S. Senate Democrat Joe Manchin, a conservative Democrat from West Virginia, and pass key aspects of the Build Back Better plan.
White House officials say there has been no sign of progress with Manchin since he said he wouldn't back the current bill in mid-December, even on a plan Manchin told Biden he could support just a month ago.
"If it doesn’t happen in the first quarter, we are cooked," said a Democratic legislative aide involved in the discussions, referring to the first three months of 2022.
VOTING RIGHTS DILEMMA
The White House is expected to detail its midterm strategy in the upcoming weeks, including more aggressive attacks against acolytes of former President Donald Trump.
The strategy includes heavy investment of time and money in competitive elections in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia and Arizona - all states also considered crucial to retaining the White House in 2024, according to three sources familiar with the plan.
With few potential legislative options, the White House is expected to continue to make fighting COVID and inflation a priority as Biden and other officials tour the country selling the benefits of a $1 trillion infrastructure law passed in November.
That includes leaning into more grassroots liberal issues like voting and abortion rights and gun control.
While the issues may energize Democratic voters, the path forward for new laws is unclear.
Republicans blocked multiple attempts to pass voting-rights reform bills last year, leaving top Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer threatening to make changes to the "filibuster" rule, which requires 60 of the 100 senators to agree on most legislation.
Democrats Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema oppose changes, saying they would damage the way the Senate operates.
While other Democrats lean on the duo to change their views, top Senate Republican suggested another approach - changing the 1887 Electoral Count Act, which allows members of Congress to dispute presidential election results when they certify them on January 6th.
After the attack on Congress by Trump supporters on Jan. 6 of 2021, experts fear the process could be at the center of a constitutional crisis over future elections.
"I think it's worth discussing," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters, without providing specifics of what he would change.
Democrats say his suggestion is insufficient because it doesn't include plans to expand access to ballots or remove new barriers being erected by Republican-controlled states.
Biden is expected to publicly demand changes to the filibuster rule to pass voting rights legislation as soon as Tuesday, when he and Vice President Kamala Harris visit Georgia to make a push for voting rights, and make the case that he exhausted options on an issue that his base cares deeply about.
Civil rights groups are asking for more.
"Many policy makers, including in the White House, did not prioritize this issue early enough," Derrick Johnson, president of the NAACP told Reuters, adding the group plans on "doubling down" on efforts to pressure Congress and the White House to act.
However, he said it may be too late.
Johnson said the lack of action has the left the country in a "precarious situation" that allowed Republicans to redraw congressional districts, particularly in southern states, without any federal protections against disparate impacts to black voters.
"In addition to that, we're looking at a midterm elections where many voices will be hampered from truly participating in the election," Johnson said.
Reporting By Jarrett Renshaw, Trevor Hunnicutt and Richard Cowan in Washington; Editing by Heather Timmons and Diane Craft
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/first- ... 022-01-10/
Re: AMERICA'S FIGHTING BULLDOG JOE BIDEN
REUTERS
"U.S. Republican Rep. Jordan not to cooperate with Capitol attack probe"
Reuters
January 10, 2022
WASHINGTON, Jan 9 (Reuters) - U.S. Republican Representative Jim Jordan, a close confidante of former President Donald Trump, said on Sunday he would not cooperate with a U.S. House committee investigating last year's attack on the Capitol.
The panel had asked Jordan to disclose conversations he had with Trump on Jan. 6, 2021, the day of the attack by Trump supporters aiming to stop Congress from formally certifying the presidential election victory of Democrat Joe Biden.
"This request is far outside the bounds of any legitimate inquiry, violates core constitutional principles and would serve to further erode legislative norms," Jordan said in a letter to committee chairman, Democrat Bennie Thompson.
His rejoinder came after the panel requested an interview with Jordan last month.
Jordan was one of Trump's main defenders during his two impeachment trials, the second on a charge of inciting the Capitol riot.
Both times, Trump was acquitted by the Senate, then controlled by Republicans.
This year, House Republicans nominated Jordan to the committee investigating the riot, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected the choice, citing his support of Trump's false claims of election fraud.
Two Republicans, Representatives Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, are members of the committee.
Reporting by Eric Beech; Editing by Clarence Fernandez
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-rep ... 022-01-10/
"U.S. Republican Rep. Jordan not to cooperate with Capitol attack probe"
Reuters
January 10, 2022
WASHINGTON, Jan 9 (Reuters) - U.S. Republican Representative Jim Jordan, a close confidante of former President Donald Trump, said on Sunday he would not cooperate with a U.S. House committee investigating last year's attack on the Capitol.
The panel had asked Jordan to disclose conversations he had with Trump on Jan. 6, 2021, the day of the attack by Trump supporters aiming to stop Congress from formally certifying the presidential election victory of Democrat Joe Biden.
"This request is far outside the bounds of any legitimate inquiry, violates core constitutional principles and would serve to further erode legislative norms," Jordan said in a letter to committee chairman, Democrat Bennie Thompson.
His rejoinder came after the panel requested an interview with Jordan last month.
Jordan was one of Trump's main defenders during his two impeachment trials, the second on a charge of inciting the Capitol riot.
Both times, Trump was acquitted by the Senate, then controlled by Republicans.
This year, House Republicans nominated Jordan to the committee investigating the riot, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected the choice, citing his support of Trump's false claims of election fraud.
Two Republicans, Representatives Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, are members of the committee.
Reporting by Eric Beech; Editing by Clarence Fernandez
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-rep ... 022-01-10/
Re: AMERICA'S FIGHTING BULLDOG JOE BIDEN
REUTERS
"Biden targets Republicans, supports Senate rule change for voting rights law"
By Trevor Hunnicutt
January 11, 2022
ATLANTA, Jan 11 (Reuters) - President Joe Biden on Tuesday made an impassioned plea for U.S. voting rights legislation stalled in Congress and said Democratic lawmakers should make a major change in Senate rules to override Republican opposition.
Calling it a "battle for the soul of America," Biden put the voting rights effort on par with the fight against segregation by slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.
He also likened it to the struggle against the forces behind the assault on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2020, by supporters of former President Donald Trump, which Biden called an "attempted coup."
Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris stood before King's gravesite as his family stood nearby, heads bowed.
Then they both spoke at Clark Atlanta University and Morehouse College, two historically Black schools, to call for passage of legislation currently being held up in Congress by Republican senators who have uniformly refused to support it.
"Not a single Republican has displayed the courage to stand up to a defeated president, to protect America's right to vote."
"Not one,” Biden said, referring to Trump.
Biden said if no breakthrough on the legislation can be achieved, lawmakers in the Senate should "change the rules including getting rid of the filibuster for this."
The filibuster is a parliamentary maneuver to require a 60-vote majority in the Senate for passage instead of a simple majority.
"Sadly the United States Senate, designed to be the greatest deliberative body, has been rendered a shell of its former self," Biden said.
It was Biden's most direct plea to date for the Senate to change its rules.
"Hear me plainly," said Biden.
"The battle for the soul of America is not over."
"We must stand strong and stand together to make that Jan. 6 does not mark the end of our democracy but begins the renaissance of our democracy."
"Pass the Freedom to Vote act."
"Pass it now to prevent voter suppression," he said.
Reporting by Trevor Hunnicutt; Additional reporting by Merdie Nzanga, Richard Cowan, Jeff Mason and Susan Heavey; Editing by Heather Timmons and Cynthia Osterman
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden- ... 022-01-11/
"Biden targets Republicans, supports Senate rule change for voting rights law"
By Trevor Hunnicutt
January 11, 2022
ATLANTA, Jan 11 (Reuters) - President Joe Biden on Tuesday made an impassioned plea for U.S. voting rights legislation stalled in Congress and said Democratic lawmakers should make a major change in Senate rules to override Republican opposition.
Calling it a "battle for the soul of America," Biden put the voting rights effort on par with the fight against segregation by slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.
He also likened it to the struggle against the forces behind the assault on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2020, by supporters of former President Donald Trump, which Biden called an "attempted coup."
Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris stood before King's gravesite as his family stood nearby, heads bowed.
Then they both spoke at Clark Atlanta University and Morehouse College, two historically Black schools, to call for passage of legislation currently being held up in Congress by Republican senators who have uniformly refused to support it.
"Not a single Republican has displayed the courage to stand up to a defeated president, to protect America's right to vote."
"Not one,” Biden said, referring to Trump.
Biden said if no breakthrough on the legislation can be achieved, lawmakers in the Senate should "change the rules including getting rid of the filibuster for this."
The filibuster is a parliamentary maneuver to require a 60-vote majority in the Senate for passage instead of a simple majority.
"Sadly the United States Senate, designed to be the greatest deliberative body, has been rendered a shell of its former self," Biden said.
It was Biden's most direct plea to date for the Senate to change its rules.
"Hear me plainly," said Biden.
"The battle for the soul of America is not over."
"We must stand strong and stand together to make that Jan. 6 does not mark the end of our democracy but begins the renaissance of our democracy."
"Pass the Freedom to Vote act."
"Pass it now to prevent voter suppression," he said.
Reporting by Trevor Hunnicutt; Additional reporting by Merdie Nzanga, Richard Cowan, Jeff Mason and Susan Heavey; Editing by Heather Timmons and Cynthia Osterman
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden- ... 022-01-11/
Re: AMERICA'S FIGHTING BULLDOG JOE BIDEN
CNBC
"Inflation rises 7% over the past year, highest since 1982"
Jeff Cox @JEFF.COX.7528 @JEFFCOXCNBCCOM
PUBLISHED WED, JAN 12 2022
KEY POINTS
* The consumer price index, an inflation gauge that measures costs across dozens of items, rose 7% in December from a year earlier, the fastest pace since June 1982.
* That was in line, however, with economist estimates, and stock market futures rose after the release.
* Excluding food and energy, so-called core CPI was up 5.5% on the year, the biggest growth since February 1991.
Inflation plowed ahead at its fastest 12-month pace in nearly 40 years during December, according to a closely watched gauge the Labor Department released Wednesday.
The consumer price index, a metric that measures costs across dozens of items, increased 7%, according to the department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics.
On a monthly basis, CPI rose 0.5%.
Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had been expecting the gauge to increase 7% on an annual basis and 0.4% from November.
The annual move was the fastest increase since June 1982 and comes amid a shortage of goods and workers and on the heels of unprecedented cash flowing through the U.S. economy from Congress and the Federal Reserve.
Despite the strong gain, stocks rose after the news while government bond yields were mostly negative.
“The December CPI report of a 7% increase over the last 12 months will be shocking for some investors as we haven’t seen a number that high” in almost 40 years, said Brian Price, head of investment management at Commonwealth Financial Network.
“However, this print was largely anticipated by many, and we can see that reaction in the bond market as longer-term interest rates are declining so far this morning.”
Excluding food and energy prices, so-called core CPI increased 5.5% year over year and 0.6% from the previous month.
That compared with estimates of 5.4% and 0.5%.
For core inflation, it was the largest annual growth since February 1991.
Shelter costs, which make up nearly one-third of the total rose 0.4% for the month and 4.1% for the year.
That was the fastest pace since February 2007.
Used vehicle prices, which have been a major component of the inflation increase during the Covid pandemic due to supply chain constraints that have limited new vehicle production, rose another 3.5% in December, bringing the increase from a year ago to 37.3%.
Conversely, energy prices mostly declined for the month, falling 0.4% as fuel oil was down 2.4% and gasoline fell 0.5%.
Still, the complex as a whole rose 29.3% in the 12-month period, including a gain of 49.6% for gasoline.
Fed officials are watching the inflation data closely and are widely expected to raise interest rates this year in an effort combat increasing prices and as the jobs picture approaches full employment.
Though the central bank uses the personal consumption expenditures price index as its primary inflation measure, policymakers take in a wide range of information in making decisions.
“This morning’s CPI read really only solidifies what we already know: Consumer wallets are feeling pricing pressures and in turn the Fed has signaled a more hawkish approach."
"But the question remains if the Fed will pick up the pace given inflation is seemingly here to stay, at least in the medium-term,” said Mike Loewengart, managing director for investment strategy at E-Trade.
“With Covid cases continuing to rise, the impact on the supply chain and labor shortages could persist, which only fuels higher prices.”
Inflation has been eating into otherwise strong wage gains for workers.
However, real average hourly earnings posted a small 0.1% increase for the month, as the 0.6% total gain outweighed the 0.5% CPI headline increase.
On a year-over-year basis, real earnings declined 2.4%, according to BLS calculations.
Fed officials largely attribute rising inflation pressures to pandemic-specific issues in which a shortage of workers has led to clogged supply chains and empty store shelves.
Though there are signs the omicron variant cases could peak soon, lingering Covid issues combined with cold weather in the Northeast point “to renewed upward pressure on food prices,” wrote Paul Ashworth, chief U.S. economist at Capital Economics.
Food prices broadly rose 0.5% for December and were up 6.3% on a 12-month basis, the biggest rise since October 2008.
Investors largely expect the Fed to start raising rates in March.
Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, at his confirmation hearing Tuesday before the Senate banking panel, did not provide any specific dates but acknowledged that as long as current conditions persist, rate hikes are on the way.
Markets are pricing a nearly 79% chance for the first quarter-percentage point increase to come in May, and see about a 50% chance the Fed could enact four such hikes in 2022, according to the CME’s FedWatch Tool.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/12/cpi-december-2021-.html
"Inflation rises 7% over the past year, highest since 1982"
Jeff Cox @JEFF.COX.7528 @JEFFCOXCNBCCOM
PUBLISHED WED, JAN 12 2022
KEY POINTS
* The consumer price index, an inflation gauge that measures costs across dozens of items, rose 7% in December from a year earlier, the fastest pace since June 1982.
* That was in line, however, with economist estimates, and stock market futures rose after the release.
* Excluding food and energy, so-called core CPI was up 5.5% on the year, the biggest growth since February 1991.
Inflation plowed ahead at its fastest 12-month pace in nearly 40 years during December, according to a closely watched gauge the Labor Department released Wednesday.
The consumer price index, a metric that measures costs across dozens of items, increased 7%, according to the department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics.
On a monthly basis, CPI rose 0.5%.
Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had been expecting the gauge to increase 7% on an annual basis and 0.4% from November.
The annual move was the fastest increase since June 1982 and comes amid a shortage of goods and workers and on the heels of unprecedented cash flowing through the U.S. economy from Congress and the Federal Reserve.
Despite the strong gain, stocks rose after the news while government bond yields were mostly negative.
“The December CPI report of a 7% increase over the last 12 months will be shocking for some investors as we haven’t seen a number that high” in almost 40 years, said Brian Price, head of investment management at Commonwealth Financial Network.
“However, this print was largely anticipated by many, and we can see that reaction in the bond market as longer-term interest rates are declining so far this morning.”
Excluding food and energy prices, so-called core CPI increased 5.5% year over year and 0.6% from the previous month.
That compared with estimates of 5.4% and 0.5%.
For core inflation, it was the largest annual growth since February 1991.
Shelter costs, which make up nearly one-third of the total rose 0.4% for the month and 4.1% for the year.
That was the fastest pace since February 2007.
Used vehicle prices, which have been a major component of the inflation increase during the Covid pandemic due to supply chain constraints that have limited new vehicle production, rose another 3.5% in December, bringing the increase from a year ago to 37.3%.
Conversely, energy prices mostly declined for the month, falling 0.4% as fuel oil was down 2.4% and gasoline fell 0.5%.
Still, the complex as a whole rose 29.3% in the 12-month period, including a gain of 49.6% for gasoline.
Fed officials are watching the inflation data closely and are widely expected to raise interest rates this year in an effort combat increasing prices and as the jobs picture approaches full employment.
Though the central bank uses the personal consumption expenditures price index as its primary inflation measure, policymakers take in a wide range of information in making decisions.
“This morning’s CPI read really only solidifies what we already know: Consumer wallets are feeling pricing pressures and in turn the Fed has signaled a more hawkish approach."
"But the question remains if the Fed will pick up the pace given inflation is seemingly here to stay, at least in the medium-term,” said Mike Loewengart, managing director for investment strategy at E-Trade.
“With Covid cases continuing to rise, the impact on the supply chain and labor shortages could persist, which only fuels higher prices.”
Inflation has been eating into otherwise strong wage gains for workers.
However, real average hourly earnings posted a small 0.1% increase for the month, as the 0.6% total gain outweighed the 0.5% CPI headline increase.
On a year-over-year basis, real earnings declined 2.4%, according to BLS calculations.
Fed officials largely attribute rising inflation pressures to pandemic-specific issues in which a shortage of workers has led to clogged supply chains and empty store shelves.
Though there are signs the omicron variant cases could peak soon, lingering Covid issues combined with cold weather in the Northeast point “to renewed upward pressure on food prices,” wrote Paul Ashworth, chief U.S. economist at Capital Economics.
Food prices broadly rose 0.5% for December and were up 6.3% on a 12-month basis, the biggest rise since October 2008.
Investors largely expect the Fed to start raising rates in March.
Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, at his confirmation hearing Tuesday before the Senate banking panel, did not provide any specific dates but acknowledged that as long as current conditions persist, rate hikes are on the way.
Markets are pricing a nearly 79% chance for the first quarter-percentage point increase to come in May, and see about a 50% chance the Fed could enact four such hikes in 2022, according to the CME’s FedWatch Tool.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/12/cpi-december-2021-.html
Re: AMERICA'S FIGHTING BULLDOG JOE BIDEN
REUTERS
"U.S. House panel seeks testimony from Republican leader about Jan. 6 Capitol attack"
By Jan Wolfe
January 12, 2022
Jan 12 (Reuters) - The U.S. congressional committee investigating the deadly Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol asked House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Wednesday to voluntarily answer questions about Donald Trump's actions on the day of the riot.
In a letter to McCarthy released publicly, the House of Representatives Select Committee requested he sit for an interview in early February.
The committee is trying to establish Trump's actions while thousands of his supporters attacked police, vandalized the Capitol and sent members of Congress and then-Vice President Mike Pence running for their lives.
The committee met virtually with Trump's former White House spokesperson, Kayleigh McEnany, on Wednesday, according to a source familiar with the meeting.
"We also must learn about how the President's plans for Jan. 6 came together, and all the other ways he attempted to alter the results of the election," the Select Committee's chairman, Representative Bennie Thompson, said in the letter to McCarthy.
The committee is also investigating whether Trump suggested to McCarthy what he should say publicly and to investigators about their conversations on the day of the attack, according to the letter.
A spokesman for McCarthy did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
McCarthy and Trump met on Jan. 28, 2021, in Palm Beach, Florida.
The panel had previously asked another Trump ally in Congress, Representative Jim Jordan, to disclose conversations he had with Trump on Jan. 6, 2021.
Jordan said on Sunday he would not cooperate with the committee's investigating, calling it illegitimate.
Two Republicans, Representatives Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, are members of the committee.
Thompson has said the panel is looking into whether it has the authority to issue subpoenas to congressional Republicans to force their cooperation.
The Select Committee has interviewed more than 340 witnesses and issued dozens of subpoenas as it investigates the deadly storming of the Capitol by a mob of Trump supporters as lawmakers were certifying President Joe Biden's election victory.
The committee is aiming to release an interim report in the summer and a final report in the fall, a source familiar with the investigation said last month.
The committee's members have said they will consider passing along evidence of criminal conduct by Trump to the U.S. Justice Department.
Such a move, known as a criminal referral, would be largely symbolic but would increase the political pressure on Attorney General Merrick Garland to charge the former president.
One police officer who battled rioters died the day after the attack and four who guarded the Capitol later died by suicide.
Four rioters also died, including a woman who was shot by a police officer while trying to climb through a shattered window.
Reporting by Jan Wolfe; Editing by Scott Malone and Sandra Maler
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-hou ... 022-01-12/
"U.S. House panel seeks testimony from Republican leader about Jan. 6 Capitol attack"
By Jan Wolfe
January 12, 2022
Jan 12 (Reuters) - The U.S. congressional committee investigating the deadly Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol asked House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Wednesday to voluntarily answer questions about Donald Trump's actions on the day of the riot.
In a letter to McCarthy released publicly, the House of Representatives Select Committee requested he sit for an interview in early February.
The committee is trying to establish Trump's actions while thousands of his supporters attacked police, vandalized the Capitol and sent members of Congress and then-Vice President Mike Pence running for their lives.
The committee met virtually with Trump's former White House spokesperson, Kayleigh McEnany, on Wednesday, according to a source familiar with the meeting.
"We also must learn about how the President's plans for Jan. 6 came together, and all the other ways he attempted to alter the results of the election," the Select Committee's chairman, Representative Bennie Thompson, said in the letter to McCarthy.
The committee is also investigating whether Trump suggested to McCarthy what he should say publicly and to investigators about their conversations on the day of the attack, according to the letter.
A spokesman for McCarthy did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
McCarthy and Trump met on Jan. 28, 2021, in Palm Beach, Florida.
The panel had previously asked another Trump ally in Congress, Representative Jim Jordan, to disclose conversations he had with Trump on Jan. 6, 2021.
Jordan said on Sunday he would not cooperate with the committee's investigating, calling it illegitimate.
Two Republicans, Representatives Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, are members of the committee.
Thompson has said the panel is looking into whether it has the authority to issue subpoenas to congressional Republicans to force their cooperation.
The Select Committee has interviewed more than 340 witnesses and issued dozens of subpoenas as it investigates the deadly storming of the Capitol by a mob of Trump supporters as lawmakers were certifying President Joe Biden's election victory.
The committee is aiming to release an interim report in the summer and a final report in the fall, a source familiar with the investigation said last month.
The committee's members have said they will consider passing along evidence of criminal conduct by Trump to the U.S. Justice Department.
Such a move, known as a criminal referral, would be largely symbolic but would increase the political pressure on Attorney General Merrick Garland to charge the former president.
One police officer who battled rioters died the day after the attack and four who guarded the Capitol later died by suicide.
Four rioters also died, including a woman who was shot by a police officer while trying to climb through a shattered window.
Reporting by Jan Wolfe; Editing by Scott Malone and Sandra Maler
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-hou ... 022-01-12/
Re: AMERICA'S FIGHTING BULLDOG JOE BIDEN
BUSINESS INSIDER
"Psaki and Fox News reporter spar over Biden's 'pandemic of the unvaccinated' comments: 'You're 17 times more likely to go to the hospital if you're not vaccinated, 20 times more likely to die'"
oseddiq@insider.com (Oma Seddiq)
10 January 2022
Jen Psaki was asked about President Joe Biden's "pandemic of the unvaccinated" characterization.
Peter Doocy of Fox News implied it was inaccurate because vaccinated people could still be infected.
Psaki said unvaccinated people were far likelier to be hospitalized or die of COVID-19 if infected.
The White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, on Monday clashed with a Fox News reporter over President Joe Biden's characterization of the COVID-19 crisis as a "pandemic of the unvaccinated."
Peter Doocy, who returned to the White House briefing room on Monday after recovering from a coronavirus infection, suggested that Biden's characterization of the pandemic didn't take into account the high number of fully vaccinated Americans who had contracted the virus.
"I understand the science says that vaccines prevent death."
"But I'm triple vaxxed, still got COVID."
"You're triple vaxxed, still got COVID," Doocy told Psaki, referring to when the fully vaccinated press secretary contracted the virus in October.
"Why is the president still referring to this as a pandemic of the unvaccinated?"
Psaki said unvaccinated people infected with the coronavirus were much more likely to be hospitalized or die of COVID-19 than those who were vaccinated.
"I had been triple vaxxed," Psaki said, meaning she received two vaccine doses and a booster.
"I had minor symptoms."
"There's a huge difference between that and being unvaccinated."
Psaki cited data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, saying: "You're 17 times more likely to go to the hospital if you're not vaccinated, 20 times more likely to die."
The CDC also found that through the end of October, unvaccinated people in the US were 10 times as likely to test positive for the virus as people who had received a booster dose.
"Those are significant, serious statistics," she added.
"So yes, the impact for people who are unvaccinated is far more dire than those who are vaccinated."
Doocy kept pressing Psaki on Biden's messaging.
"Will the president update his language at some time to be more reflective of the fact that people who are triple vaccinated are catching and spreading COVID?" he asked.
Psaki said the White House had made clear that vaccinated people could still test positive for the coronavirus, reiterating the "significant difference" between the unvaccinated and vaccinated in terms of the severity of COVID-19.
Biden has repeatedly called the public-health crisis a "pandemic of the unvaccinated" and pointed to the significantly worse health outcomes among unvaccinated people.
COVID-19 vaccines have for months been widely available to Americans in most age groups, but about 15% of adults in the US were still unvaccinated as of two weeks ago, The New York Times reported.
Monday's exchange came with the US facing a surge in COVID-19 cases driven by the highly contagious Omicron variant.
The daily average of newly admitted COVID-19 hospital patients for the week that ended January 4 was 16,458, according to the CDC.
The CDC says vaccination is the best way to prevent severe illness and death from the virus.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medica ... d=msedgntp
"Psaki and Fox News reporter spar over Biden's 'pandemic of the unvaccinated' comments: 'You're 17 times more likely to go to the hospital if you're not vaccinated, 20 times more likely to die'"
oseddiq@insider.com (Oma Seddiq)
10 January 2022
Jen Psaki was asked about President Joe Biden's "pandemic of the unvaccinated" characterization.
Peter Doocy of Fox News implied it was inaccurate because vaccinated people could still be infected.
Psaki said unvaccinated people were far likelier to be hospitalized or die of COVID-19 if infected.
The White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, on Monday clashed with a Fox News reporter over President Joe Biden's characterization of the COVID-19 crisis as a "pandemic of the unvaccinated."
Peter Doocy, who returned to the White House briefing room on Monday after recovering from a coronavirus infection, suggested that Biden's characterization of the pandemic didn't take into account the high number of fully vaccinated Americans who had contracted the virus.
"I understand the science says that vaccines prevent death."
"But I'm triple vaxxed, still got COVID."
"You're triple vaxxed, still got COVID," Doocy told Psaki, referring to when the fully vaccinated press secretary contracted the virus in October.
"Why is the president still referring to this as a pandemic of the unvaccinated?"
Psaki said unvaccinated people infected with the coronavirus were much more likely to be hospitalized or die of COVID-19 than those who were vaccinated.
"I had been triple vaxxed," Psaki said, meaning she received two vaccine doses and a booster.
"I had minor symptoms."
"There's a huge difference between that and being unvaccinated."
Psaki cited data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, saying: "You're 17 times more likely to go to the hospital if you're not vaccinated, 20 times more likely to die."
The CDC also found that through the end of October, unvaccinated people in the US were 10 times as likely to test positive for the virus as people who had received a booster dose.
"Those are significant, serious statistics," she added.
"So yes, the impact for people who are unvaccinated is far more dire than those who are vaccinated."
Doocy kept pressing Psaki on Biden's messaging.
"Will the president update his language at some time to be more reflective of the fact that people who are triple vaccinated are catching and spreading COVID?" he asked.
Psaki said the White House had made clear that vaccinated people could still test positive for the coronavirus, reiterating the "significant difference" between the unvaccinated and vaccinated in terms of the severity of COVID-19.
Biden has repeatedly called the public-health crisis a "pandemic of the unvaccinated" and pointed to the significantly worse health outcomes among unvaccinated people.
COVID-19 vaccines have for months been widely available to Americans in most age groups, but about 15% of adults in the US were still unvaccinated as of two weeks ago, The New York Times reported.
Monday's exchange came with the US facing a surge in COVID-19 cases driven by the highly contagious Omicron variant.
The daily average of newly admitted COVID-19 hospital patients for the week that ended January 4 was 16,458, according to the CDC.
The CDC says vaccination is the best way to prevent severe illness and death from the virus.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medica ... d=msedgntp
Re: AMERICA'S FIGHTING BULLDOG JOE BIDEN
FOX NEWS
"‘I’m tired of being quiet!’: Biden backs voting rights passage"
by: Tulsi Kamath, Tom Palmer, Joe Khalil
Posted: Jan 11, 2022 / 04:11 PM EST / Updated: Jan 11, 2022 / 05:03 PM EST
CHICAGO (NewsNation Now) — Facing increasing demands from his progressive base, President Joe Biden is now going all out, pressuring Congress to move on voting rights, calling this a turning point for the nation.
“I’m tired of being quiet!” he said, emphatically pounding the podium.
“I will not yield."
"I will not flinch,” in the effort to protect democracy.
Biden used a speech in Georgia Tuesday to throw his support, for the first time, behind changing the Senate’s filibuster rules to allow action on voting rights legislation, declaring that changing the rules would be to protect the “heart and soul of our democracy.”
“We call on Congress to get done what history will judge,” Biden said.
“Pass the Freedom to Vote Act."
"Pass it now, so that here in Georgia, there’s full access to voting by mail, there are enough dropboxes, you can bring food & water to people waiting in line.”
Biden told the audience, “The next few days, when these bills come to a vote, will mark a turning point in this nation.”
“Will we choose democracy over autocracy, light over shadow, justice over injustice?"
"I know where I stand."
"I will not yield."
"I will not flinch,” Biden said.
“I will defend your right to vote and our democracy against all enemies foreign and, yes, domestic."
"And so the question is where will the institution of United States Senate stand?”
“Hear me plainly,” Biden said.
“The battle for the soul of America is not over.”
The LA Times reported Biden’s move underscores the pressure the president is facing from his base to do something about Republican-backed state laws that restrict access to the polls before the November midterm election.
Some voting rights advocates planned to boycott the speech and instead spend the day working.
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, known for her untiring voting rights work, also was skipping the event.
So far, Democrats have been unable to agree among themselves over potential changes to the Senate filibuster rules to allow action on voting rights, despite months of private negotiations.
The Hill reports to change the rules, Democrats need total unity from all 50 of their members, something they don’t yet have.
Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) both support a supermajority requirement for legislation, while others, including Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), haven’t yet taken a position.
Many Democrats say the rule change would apply only to issues grounded in constitutional rights such as voting, but Republicans and others say it would inevitably be extended to other legislation, diminishing the overall power of the filibuster, according to the New York Times.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki rejected some activists’ complaints that Biden hasn’t been a strong enough advocate.
“I think we would dispute the notion that the president hasn’t been active or vocal."
"He’s given a range of speeches, he’s advocated for voting rights to pass,” she said.
“We understand the frustration by many advocates that this is not passed into law, yet."
"He would love to have signed this into law himself.”
But laws have already passed in at least 19 states that make it more difficult to vote.
Voting rights groups view the changes as a subtler form of the ballot restrictions like literacy tests and poll taxes once used to disenfranchise Black voters, now a key Democratic constituency.
And Republicans who have fallen in line behind Trump’s election misinformation are separately promoting efforts to influence future elections by installing sympathetic leaders in local election posts and backing for elective office some of those who participated in the violent Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol a year ago.
Georgia is at the center of it all, one of the key battleground states in the 2020 elections.
As the votes were being recounted, Trump told a top state election official he wanted the official to “find” enough votes to overturn his loss.
The state’s votes nonetheless went to Biden, and both of its Senate seats went to Democrats as well.
Then last year, the Republican governor signed a sweeping rewrite of election rules that, among other things, gives the State Election Board new powers to intervene in county election offices and to remove and replace local election officials.
That has led to concerns that the Republican-controlled state board could exert more influence over the administration of elections, including the certification of county results.
This story is developing.
Refresh for updates.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
https://fox8.com/news/watch-biden-deliv ... ng-rights/
"‘I’m tired of being quiet!’: Biden backs voting rights passage"
by: Tulsi Kamath, Tom Palmer, Joe Khalil
Posted: Jan 11, 2022 / 04:11 PM EST / Updated: Jan 11, 2022 / 05:03 PM EST
CHICAGO (NewsNation Now) — Facing increasing demands from his progressive base, President Joe Biden is now going all out, pressuring Congress to move on voting rights, calling this a turning point for the nation.
“I’m tired of being quiet!” he said, emphatically pounding the podium.
“I will not yield."
"I will not flinch,” in the effort to protect democracy.
Biden used a speech in Georgia Tuesday to throw his support, for the first time, behind changing the Senate’s filibuster rules to allow action on voting rights legislation, declaring that changing the rules would be to protect the “heart and soul of our democracy.”
“We call on Congress to get done what history will judge,” Biden said.
“Pass the Freedom to Vote Act."
"Pass it now, so that here in Georgia, there’s full access to voting by mail, there are enough dropboxes, you can bring food & water to people waiting in line.”
Biden told the audience, “The next few days, when these bills come to a vote, will mark a turning point in this nation.”
“Will we choose democracy over autocracy, light over shadow, justice over injustice?"
"I know where I stand."
"I will not yield."
"I will not flinch,” Biden said.
“I will defend your right to vote and our democracy against all enemies foreign and, yes, domestic."
"And so the question is where will the institution of United States Senate stand?”
“Hear me plainly,” Biden said.
“The battle for the soul of America is not over.”
The LA Times reported Biden’s move underscores the pressure the president is facing from his base to do something about Republican-backed state laws that restrict access to the polls before the November midterm election.
Some voting rights advocates planned to boycott the speech and instead spend the day working.
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, known for her untiring voting rights work, also was skipping the event.
So far, Democrats have been unable to agree among themselves over potential changes to the Senate filibuster rules to allow action on voting rights, despite months of private negotiations.
The Hill reports to change the rules, Democrats need total unity from all 50 of their members, something they don’t yet have.
Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) both support a supermajority requirement for legislation, while others, including Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), haven’t yet taken a position.
Many Democrats say the rule change would apply only to issues grounded in constitutional rights such as voting, but Republicans and others say it would inevitably be extended to other legislation, diminishing the overall power of the filibuster, according to the New York Times.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki rejected some activists’ complaints that Biden hasn’t been a strong enough advocate.
“I think we would dispute the notion that the president hasn’t been active or vocal."
"He’s given a range of speeches, he’s advocated for voting rights to pass,” she said.
“We understand the frustration by many advocates that this is not passed into law, yet."
"He would love to have signed this into law himself.”
But laws have already passed in at least 19 states that make it more difficult to vote.
Voting rights groups view the changes as a subtler form of the ballot restrictions like literacy tests and poll taxes once used to disenfranchise Black voters, now a key Democratic constituency.
And Republicans who have fallen in line behind Trump’s election misinformation are separately promoting efforts to influence future elections by installing sympathetic leaders in local election posts and backing for elective office some of those who participated in the violent Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol a year ago.
Georgia is at the center of it all, one of the key battleground states in the 2020 elections.
As the votes were being recounted, Trump told a top state election official he wanted the official to “find” enough votes to overturn his loss.
The state’s votes nonetheless went to Biden, and both of its Senate seats went to Democrats as well.
Then last year, the Republican governor signed a sweeping rewrite of election rules that, among other things, gives the State Election Board new powers to intervene in county election offices and to remove and replace local election officials.
That has led to concerns that the Republican-controlled state board could exert more influence over the administration of elections, including the certification of county results.
This story is developing.
Refresh for updates.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
https://fox8.com/news/watch-biden-deliv ... ng-rights/
Re: AMERICA'S FIGHTING BULLDOG JOE BIDEN
REUTERS
"Biden says 'price increases still too high'"
By Kanishka Singh, Jeff Mason
JANUARY 12, 2022
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. President Joe Biden admitted on Wednesday that his administration still had “more work to do with price increases still too high” even as he stated that there was progress made in slowing the rate of price rises.
His statement was released by the White House after U.S. consumer prices increased solidly in December, culminating in the largest annual rise in inflation in nearly four decades.
“We are making progress in slowing the rate of price increases."
"At the same time, this report underscores that we still have more work to do, with price increases still too high and squeezing family budgets”, Biden said.
In the 12 months through December, the consumer price index surged 7%.
That was the biggest year-on-year increase since June 1982 and followed a 6.8% rise in November.
The report from the Labor Department on Wednesday followed on the heels of data last Friday showing that the labor market was at or near maximum employment.
White House economic adviser Brian Deese said later on Wednesday that supply chain challenges manifested themselves more than people had anticipated as he addressed questions about a rise in inflation.
“We’ve seen a number of unanticipated outcomes,” Deese told reporters in a briefing.
Price inflation is a “global phenomenon,” he said, one that is connected to the COVID-19 pandemic and related supply chain challenges that have evolved.
Deese said the Biden administration plans to take additional steps this month to attempt to further ease bottlenecks at ports.
He said most forecasters expect prices to moderate over the course of 2022.
Reporting by Kanishka Singh in Bengaluru and Jeff Mason in Washington; editing by Jonathan Oatis
https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-eco ... SFWN2TS17P
"Biden says 'price increases still too high'"
By Kanishka Singh, Jeff Mason
JANUARY 12, 2022
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. President Joe Biden admitted on Wednesday that his administration still had “more work to do with price increases still too high” even as he stated that there was progress made in slowing the rate of price rises.
His statement was released by the White House after U.S. consumer prices increased solidly in December, culminating in the largest annual rise in inflation in nearly four decades.
“We are making progress in slowing the rate of price increases."
"At the same time, this report underscores that we still have more work to do, with price increases still too high and squeezing family budgets”, Biden said.
In the 12 months through December, the consumer price index surged 7%.
That was the biggest year-on-year increase since June 1982 and followed a 6.8% rise in November.
The report from the Labor Department on Wednesday followed on the heels of data last Friday showing that the labor market was at or near maximum employment.
White House economic adviser Brian Deese said later on Wednesday that supply chain challenges manifested themselves more than people had anticipated as he addressed questions about a rise in inflation.
“We’ve seen a number of unanticipated outcomes,” Deese told reporters in a briefing.
Price inflation is a “global phenomenon,” he said, one that is connected to the COVID-19 pandemic and related supply chain challenges that have evolved.
Deese said the Biden administration plans to take additional steps this month to attempt to further ease bottlenecks at ports.
He said most forecasters expect prices to moderate over the course of 2022.
Reporting by Kanishka Singh in Bengaluru and Jeff Mason in Washington; editing by Jonathan Oatis
https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-eco ... SFWN2TS17P