News
Will Members of Congress Get to See McCarthy’s Secret 3-Page Addendum of ‘Controversial Concessions’ Before Voting?
At 5:00 PM ET Monday the House will reconvene to vote on the rules for how the 118th Congress will operate – discussions which consumed now-Speaker Kevin McCarthy and his top lieutenants last week as they wheeled and dealed to get him the gavel. Few know all the details of what McCarthy gave away to win the coveted Speaker’s seat, but it took five days, fifteen different votes, some last-minute begging, and a Republican-on-Republican near-fist-fight on the floor of the House of Representatives before he was able to cinch the deal.
But not included in that 55-page document, according to PunchBowl News, is a “secret three-page addendum that McCarthy and his allies hashed out during several days of grueling negotiations with the House Freedom Caucus.”
Punchbowl News’ John Bresnahan on MSNBC Monday afternoon told Katy Tur that the “really controversial” secret three-page addendum is being “circulated” among some House Republicans but none are allowed to keep a copy, and it is not being released publicly. Presumably no Democrat has been shown the document.
The secret addendum, PunchBowl News also reported, “includes the most controversial concessions McCarthy made in order to become speaker – three seats on the Rules Committee for conservatives, freezing spending at FY2022 levels, a debt-ceiling strategy, coveted committee assignments and more.”
Indeed, while some House Republicans have claimed they were not given anything to vote for or to not vote against McCarthy, Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL), who placed third in the race for Speaker, admits he traded his slim prospect of becoming Speaker for a seat on powerful House GOP Steering Committee. Indeed, his name is the last one on the list.
One of there most controversial parts of the rules package is the creation of a“select subcommittee on the weaponization of the federal government,” which would investigate the Dept. of Justice’s current criminal investigations into the January 6, 2021 insurrection.
Some familiar with the U.S. Constitution’s separation of powers provisions suggest they cannot do this.
“This idea of ‘reviewing’ criminal cases in progress is really about interfering with them,” tweets former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance. She notes, “it violates separation of powers. MAGA Republicans know this. They’re setting up a situation where the AG will properly refuse to provide info, which they’ll use as a pretext to impeach.”
Norman Ornstein, an Emeritus scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), and a contributing editor for the Atlantic, calls it “a test for these so-called centrist Republicans. If they vote for this horrible rules package, they are complicit in radical, dangerous extremism. Never, ever call them moderates or reasonable.”
MSNBC’s Steve Benen reports some of the deals McCarthy made, presumably which appear either in the 55-page rules agreement or in the secret three-page addendum, include a “Motion to vacate the chair,” and three seats on the Rules Committee going to the far right.
More bad news, not just for McCarthy and the U.S. but the world economic system.
“McCarthy reportedly agreed to pursue a hostage crisis that would force the country into a possible default, while scrapping the so-called Gephardt rule, which allows the Congress to suspend, rather than lift, the debt limit.”
It’s not certain McCarthy will get the rules package passed, certainly not certain it will pass on the first round of voting.
“Republican @RepNancyMace told me yesterday that she’s considering withholding her vote on the Rules package until she gets more information about the handshake agreements that Speaker McCarthy made with members but hasn’t yet disclosed,” reports CBS News’ Margaret Brennan.
Will GOP Rep. Nancy Mace vote on Monday in favor of the proposed House rules package? “I am on the fence right now,” she said. pic.twitter.com/SuZ4jkdw2h
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) January 8, 2023
The Freedom Caucus, which is the beneficiary of many of these “really controversial” secret rules, is the most far-right caucus in the House of Representatives. Its first chairman was U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), who now serves as its vice-chair. Its current chair is U.S. Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA), reportedly under investigation by the FBI for his role in the January 6, 2021 insurrection. Congressman Perry refused to comply with a subpoena from the House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack. Perry on Sunday announced he would not recuse himself from serving on the House Judiciary Committee, which has oversight responsibility of the DOJ and FBI, despite being investigated by them.
You can watch as the House votes on the Rules package at 5 PM live on C-SPAN.
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
 |
Maine Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Graham Platner is under fire after releasing a video declaring that new allegations against him are false, yet he is “taking time to reflect” on a path forward.
Politico on Monday afternoon reported that a woman who dated Platner, Jenny Racicot, “says he forced her to have sex with him nearly five years ago despite her repeated objections, an allegation Platner denies.”
“Racicot said she had an on-and-off relationship with Platner,” Politico reported, “for more than two years before he entered her rural Maine home uninvited one night in late 2021, deeply intoxicated, and forced himself on her while she repeatedly told him to stop. She said she cut off contact with him after telling him the encounter was not consensual.”
In a video posted to social media eleven minutes after the Politico story dropped, Platner says, “I wanted to directly address the troubling, serious, and false allegations against me. Any accusation of nonconsensual behavior is categorically false.”
He said he and his supporters “were united in a love of Maine, a belief that our politics must change, in a focus on defeating Susan Collins.”
“So, regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting, but mindful the political reality will inflict, we are taking the time to reflect on the best path forward for the state that I love, the people that I love, the movement I belong to, and the goal of defeating Susan Collins.”
“Those were the goals when we launched this campaign. And they remain my goals today.”
“Throughout it all, you never turned your back on me. And I will not turn my back on you now. Every one of you deserves to see that vision come to fruition and see Susan Collins defeated. And we will use every tool at our disposal to do so.”
The Bulwark’s Tim Miller, a political commentator who served as the communications director for the Jeb Bush 2016 presidential campaign, blasted Platner.
“I’m sorry but ‘we are taking time to reflect on the best path forward’ is not an option on the table,” Miller wrote. “Either it’s false and you campaign with vigor or it’s true and you get out / apologize to everyone you let down.”
Journalist Ryan Grim, commenting on Platner’s video, noted that Platner “strongly suggests he is considering dropping out. Already Troy Jackson and Chellie Pingree, both gubernatorial candidates, are being kicked around in Maine circles as potential replacements.”
Several others, including Puck News’ Peter Hamby, predicted Platner will be dropping out.
Platner had postponed several campaign events before the Politico story was published.
— Graham Platner for Senate (@grahamformaine) July 6, 2026
President Donald Trump is facing backlash after posting a video of children — including showing their unblurred faces — graduating from kindergarten, with some of the girls purportedly wearing hijabs.
“President Trump posted a captionless video of graduating kindergarteners on Truth Social on Monday, goading his supporters into verbally attacking little children simply for being Muslim,” The New Republic reported. “The clip is from Gateway STEM Academy, a majority-Black K-8 public charter school in St. Paul, Minnesota. It shows about 21 children in caps and gowns on stage singing a song together. Most of the girls are wearing hijabs.”
The original post of the video which Trump reposted reads: “Public school in St. Paul, Minnesota. Every girl is in a hijab … in kindergarten.”
Trump did not add any comments. TNR called the post “Islamophobic, weird, and creepy,” while noting that the comments section of Trump’s post was filled with calls “by racist, xenophobic MAGA supporters” to “deport the children and ban hijabs.”
TNR also noted that it “should come as no surprise that Trump isn’t above attacking children who just learned how to read, but this post is still particularly discomforting—and will certainly contribute to the already potent level of anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. and in Minnesota.”
Critics blasted Trump.
“There is something deeply unsettling about the president of the United States—the most powerful person in the world—going after kindergarten schoolchildren in Minnesota because they wore hijabs, as Trump has done this morning on his website,” The Bulwark’s Sam Stein wrote.
One social media commentator wrote, “Trump posted an unblurred video of more than a dozen Muslim kindergartners to Truth Social, exposing the children’s faces while targeting them for their religion.”
Another added, “Trump is a bigot. The president took to Truth Social to attack kindergarteners in hijabs. These are little kids. The president isn’t just a bigot, he’s also a coward.”
The original video was posted to the X social media platform in June.
U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) at the time commented, “If you are in a public school in America, you should be speaking english.”
Image via Reuters
President Donald Trump’s apparent efforts to delay releasing the $5.8 million civil judgment to E. Jean Carroll are being met with a warning by the journalist’s legal team, who suggest there could be a legal maneuver for Trump to employ to forgo paying the judgment in either of the two cases he lost.
According to The Guardian, on July 4, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered Trump to release the $5.8 million judgment, which is in escrow, to Carroll by this coming Tuesday — or explain why he would not do so.
Carroll’s attorneys think Trump may be trying to buy time to mount another legal strategy, telling the judge that Trump’s request for an extension “appears to be little more than yet another play for time.”
“The case is separate from Trump’s appeal of a Manhattan civil jury’s 2024 award of $83.3m to Carroll for defamation,” The Guardian explains. “But her lawyers have suggested a legal scenario in which the president might seek to conjoin the cases and further delay payment of both.”
Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan (no relation to the judge) wrote, “We can only assume that defendant is seeking … to buy time so he can try to concoct some new basis to put off paying plaintiff presumably in connection with his forthcoming petition and motion for a rehearing.”
Trump’s former attorney, Justin Smith, in one of his final acts, wrote to the Supreme Court suggesting that his client would be appealing the $83.3 million civil judgment.
Smith argued that the Supreme Court “may wish to consider the petitions together,” given they involve the same parties.
The larger judgment case involves possible questions of presidential immunity, and that has Carroll’s attorneys concerned.
“A conjoined case, Carroll’s lawyers fear, could result in both judgments being wiped out,” The Guardian reports.
The president has also made clear he is no fan of Judge Kaplan, after the jurist made several rulings that “angered” Trump.
“What else can you expect from a Trump Hating, Clinton appointed judge, who went out of his way to make sure that the result was as negative as it could possible be,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in 2023, “speaking to, and in control of, a jury from an anti-Trump area which is probably the worst place in the US for me to get a fair ‘trial’.”
Image via Reuters
Platner Scorched Over ‘Taking Time’ Video After New Accusation
Trump Sparks Fury Online After Posting Unblurred Video of Muslim Kindergartners in Hijabs
One Legal Maneuver Threatens to Undo Everything E. Jean Carroll Won
Inside the Group Helping MAGA Voters Walk Away — And What Finally Pushed Them
