That Pelosi Replacement

The big news last week was that long-time Dem leader would be stepping down and making room for younger leadership…..

Rep. Hakeem Jefferies is being served up as the new Dem leader in the House.

As Nancy Pelosi steps down from her leadership post among House Democrats, she promises not to be a meddling “mother-in-law in the kitchen” as a new generation takes over, per the Daily Beast. And while her successor as party leader in the chamber has not been officially chosen, pretty much everyone is betting it will be Rep. Hakeem Jeffries of New York City, currently chair of the House Democratic Caucus. Jeffries formally announced his bid to replace Pelosi on Friday, reports NBC News. Details:

  • A first: Jeffries would become the first Black lawmaker to lead a party in the House or Senate, per the Washington Post.
  • New generation: Jeffries is 52 and expected lieutenants Katherine M. Clark of Massachusetts and Pete Aguilar of California are 59 and 43. They would replace Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, and James Clyburn—who are all in their 80s—as the top three House Democrats.
  • Self-described: “I’m a Black progressive Democrat concerned with addressing racial and social and economic injustice with the fierce urgency of now,” Jeffries told the Atlantic last year in a profile. But he added, “There will never be a moment where I bend the knee to hard-left democratic socialism.” Elaborating on that distinction: “Black progressives do tend to tackle issues first and foremost with an understanding that systemic racism has been in the soil of America for over 400 years,” he said. “Hard-left progressives tend to view the defining problem in America as one that is anchored in class.”
  • But how progressive is he? At New York, Zak Cheney-Rice dubs Jeffries “Speaker of the Establishment,” and it’s not a compliment. Jeffries has seen a “rapid ascent up the party’s ranks secured by endearing himself to its elders and siding with longtime incumbents and party leaders even as they’ve grown out of touch with their constituents,” writes Cheney-Rice. “Much will be made of the historic nature of his promotion and the change it appears to signify. But for the party Establishment, the benefit of this generational change appears to be stasis.”
  • Bio: Jeffries is a lawyer and a Brooklyn native who has been in the House since 2013, per the BBC. The Post notes that he was once seen as an anti-establishment figure when the “Brooklyn Democratic machine” redrew districts to “stifle” Jeffries’ political ascent. The tactic was featured in the 2010 documentary Gerrymandering. Since then, however, he “has forged relationships with Democratic establishment figures in Washington while navigating the ascending left in his backyard.” The latter is a reference to figures such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
  • Famous constituent: During the Senate impeachment hearing of former President Trump, Jeffries made headlines by quoting a famous lyric of the late rapper Notorious B.I.G. “And if you don’t know, now you know.” See the video at CBS News. The rapper, real name Christopher Wallace, was from Jeffries’ district, and Jeffries previously praised him on the House floor as the “classic embodiment of the American dream,” per the BBC.

I agree that the Dems have needed new leadership for decades…..good to see it is finally coming to a head…..but I am not certain in these days when special interests the Dems are no better than the GOP as far as bought ideology.

Do you think change is coming?

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Advertisement

Ron Paul On Ukraine

Former representative, Ron Paul, has made his feelings known about what he calls a ‘boondoggle’…..

Last week the world stood on the very edge of a nuclear war, as Ukraine’s US-funded president, Vladimir Zelensky, urged NATO military action over a missile that landed on Polish soil. “This is a Russian missile attack on collective security! This is a really significant escalation. Action is needed,” said Zelensky immediately after the missile landed.

But there was a problem. The missile was fired from Ukraine – likely an accident in the fog of war. Was it actually a Russian missile, of course, that might mean World War III. But Zelensky didn’t seem to be bothered by the prospect of the world blown up, judging from his reckless rhetoric.

While Zelensky has been treated as a saint by the US media, the Biden Administration, and both parties in Congress, something unprecedented happened this time: the Biden Administration pushed back. According to press reports, several Zelensky calls to Biden or senior Biden Staff went unanswered.

When US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan finally returned Zelensky’s call, he is reported to have said, “tread carefully” on claims Russia was behind the missiles landing in Poland. The Biden Administration went on to publicly dispute Zelensky’s continued insistence that Russia shot missiles into NATO-Member Poland. After two days of Washington opposition to his claims, Zelensky finally, sort of, backed down.

We’ve heard rumors of President Biden’s frustration over Zelensky’s endless begging and ingratitude for the 60 or so billion dollars doled out to him by the US government, but this is the clearest public example of the Biden Administration’s acceptance that it has a “Zelensky problem.”

Zelensky must have understood that Washington and Brussels knew it was not a Russian missile. Considering the vast intelligence capabilities of the US in that war zone, it is likely the US government knew in real time that the missiles were not Russian. For Zelensky to claim otherwise seemed almost unhinged. And for what seems like the first time, Washington noticed.

As a result, there has been a minor – but hopefully growing – revolt among conservatives in Washington over this dangerous episode. Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor-Greene introduced legislation demanding an audit of the tens of billions of dollars shipped to Ukraine – with perhaps $50 billion more in the pipeline. The resolution currently has eleven co-sponsors.

Rep. Matt Gaetz has publicly stated that he would not vote for one more dollar for Ukraine. Others, like US Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ), have gone even further. In a recent Tweet Rep. Gosar called US support for Ukraine a “corrupt money-laundering operation.” As the fallout from the recent collapse of the FTX crypto exchange points to possible political corruption, his claims may prove to be accurate.

When Sen. Paul introduced an amendment to the massive aid package to Ukraine calling for someone to audit the funds, he was ridiculed and attacked. Some seven months later, his position appears far more accepted. And that’s a good thing.

When the Ukraine war hysteria finally dies down – as the Covid hysteria died down before it – it will become obvious to vastly more Americans what an absolute fiasco this whole thing has been. Hopefully Republicans will accelerate that process when they take the House in January. It cannot come too soon!

(antiwar.com)

I am by no means a Libertarian but I will agree with Paul on several of his points….

I do not understand Americans that blindly accept whatever crap spread by the government and their agents, the media….money wasted and no one cares.

Taylor-Green, someone I do not care for, has led the charge in the House to audit the Ukraine aid packages….

A group of House Republicans introduced a bill Thursday to audit the funds that Congress has approved to spend on the war in Ukraine.

The effort is being led by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and supported by a group of Republicans that have been critical of US aid to Ukraine. The resolution’s cosponsors include Reps. Thomas Massie (KY), Matt Gaetz (FL), Barry Moore (AL), Andrew Clyde (GA), and Cory Mills, a representative-elect from Florida.

According to The Hill, Greene introduced the bill as a privileged resolution, meaning it will be sent to the relevant committee, which will have 14 business days to either reject the legislation or approve it for a vote on the House floor.

If the bill is not discussed by the committee within 14 days, Greene has the option to force a House vote. Greene said she’s prepared to reintroduce the bill in the next Congress when Republicans have a majority in the House.

“I’ll introduce this resolution again, but I’ll also be calling for a full audit. We voted ‘no’ to send money over there, but we’re also going to audit what’s happening in Ukraine,” Greene said.

While most Republicans still support spending on the war in Ukraine, many have come out in favor of increasing oversight of the aid. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), who is expected to be the speaker in the next Congress, has said a Republican-controlled House wouldn’t send a “blank check” to Ukraine.

McCarthy later downplayed his comments and said the lack of oversight was the issue, and other Republican leaders insisted they would keep arming Ukraine. But McCarthy’s comments were still enough to prompt a push to approve a massive new Ukraine aid package before the next Congress is sworn in, and the White House has asked for $37.7 billion.

If the new aid package is approved, it will bring total US spending on a proxy war on Russia’s border to about $105 billion. If it’s spent at the rate of other aid packages, the White House will likely be looking for more come spring.

I agree with the principle of the audit but I fear this bill is nothing more than grandstanding by the Repubs….after all the people on the committees are owned by the contractors that are making out like bandits from these aid packages.

Speaking of more aid…..

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced Tuesday an additional $4.5 billion in direct budgetary aid for the Ukrainian government.

Yellen said that the new funds will bring total US budgetary aid for Ukraine to $13 billion, and more is coming as Ukraine expects the US to help pay for its massive budget deficit in 2023.

The aid is being disbursed by the US through the World Bank. According to the US Agency for International Development (USAID), the funds will be sent to Ukraine in two tranches before the end of 2022.

The budgetary aid is meant to fund Ukrainian government services. USAID said that there will be “robust safeguards” and third-party monitoring to “ensure accountability and transparency in the use of these funds,” but it’s not clear how much real oversight there will be.

(antiwar.com)

Ukraine demands and expects the US to pay all their bills….and yet no one cares.

Thoughts?

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”