Connect with us

News

Marjorie Taylor Greene Takes Potshot at Biden in September 11 Tribute

Published

on

Monday marks the 22nd anniversary of the attacks of September 11, 2001. While most politicians are keeping partisanship out of it—even, uncharacteristically, Donald Trump—Georgia Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene took the time to slam President Joe Biden in her tribute.

“Today, we remember the lives taken from us by the hands of Islamic terrorism 22 years ago. Americans are still dying and suffering from the toxic chemicals and dust they endured after the buildings fell. Let us also not forget the betrayal of everyone who died that fateful day by the Biden Administration who handed over weapons and ceded the territory we held in the Middle East to the Taliban, who works with Al-Qaeda, the very enemy we sought to defeat after decades of fighting and lost American lives,” Greene wrote on X, alongside a photo of firefighters lowering a flag to half-mast.

Greene’s comment makes reference to the pullout of American forces in Afghanistan in 2021. Though Biden announced that the full withdrawal would happen by September 11, 2021—the 20th anniversary of 9/11—it was completed on August 30 of that year.

READ MORE: ‘What They’re Doing for Golf Is So Great’: Trump Claims ‘Nobody’s Gotten to the Bottom of 9/11’ as He Hosts Saudi-Funded Event

Though the withdrawal happened in Biden’s administration, the deal was brokered with the Taliban by former President Trump, and the Biden administration placed the blame on him in a 2023 report from the National Security Council, the Associated Press reported. Biden was “severely constrained” by Trump’s moves, according to the report. The report said that at the start of Biden’s term, “the Taliban were in the strongest military position that they had been in since 2001, controlling or contesting nearly half of the country.”

It’s not as simple as merely blaming Trump, however. Trump’s deal included a clause that would have allowed the U.S. to back out of the deal in the event that peace talks failed, according to the AP—which they did.

“If he thought the deal was bad, he could have renegotiated. He had plenty of opportunity to do that if he so desired,” Chris Miller, former acting defense secretary at the end of the Trump administration told the AP. Biden countered by saying that had he gone back on the agreement, he would have had to send more troops to Afghanistan, which ran counter to Biden and Trump’s shared goal of pulling out of the country.

“The choice I had to make, as your president, was either to follow through on that agreement or be prepared to go back to fighting the Taliban in the middle of the spring fighting season,” Biden said at the time.

While Greene’s tribute to those lost in the September 11 attacks was partisan, tributes from her fellow Republicans stayed neutral.

“In the weeks that followed, we weren’t black or white; gay or straight; Democrat or Republican. We were all American. In the face of tragedy, we found unity. In the face of despair, we found renewed hope. Even as we pray that no calamity like it ever happens again, we can still long to be reunited once again as one nation under God,” Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy posted on X.

Even Trump kept things nonpartisan in a video posted to his social media platform, Truth Social.

“No one who lived through the horror of the September 11 terrorist attacks can ever forget the agony and the anguish of that terrible day. It was a terrible day. The images of dark plumes of smoke billowing over Lower Manhattan, the Pentagon, and a field in Pennsylvania—it was a beautiful field—are seared into our minds forever, we will never forget.

“Today on the solemn anniversary of those monstrous attacks, we remember the 2,977 precious souls who were savagely taken from us on that morning 22 years ago. Leaving a void that can never be filled—can never be filled. No matter what happens, it can never be filled. We will say a prayer for each of the beautiful families left behind whose pain is beyond comprehension. What they’ve gone through is not even believable.

“We honor the firefighters, the great New York PD—police department—what great people they are. They are so great. And the Port Authority officers, the Virginia, DC and Pentagon police and the military service members and other first responders—actually, all over the country—they acted with supreme heroism and they went to the site of the most heinous crime. They would leave other states far away and go to the World Trade Center site, the Pentagon, they go to Pennsylvania. When many cases gave their lives in the line of duty. God bless the memory of all of those who perished in the 9/11 attacks, we will never ever forget. Never forget you, we love you. God bless their families and God bless America. Thank you,” Trump said.

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

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.

CORRUPTION

Karoline Leavitt Says Qatar Won’t Expect Anything in Return for Deluxe Jet

Published

on

The nation of Qatar has reportedly promised to give President Donald Trump a new deluxe jet for use as Air Force One—but White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said that it isn’t a quid pro quo situation, as they know not to expect anything in return.

This weekend, ABC News broke the story that Qatar’s royal family is planning to give the Defense Department a Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet. The jet is reportedly so tricked out that it’s been called a “flying palace,” according to ABC News. After Trump leaves office, the ownership of the plane will transfer from the DoD to the Trump presidential library foundation.

Some might see the gift as an attempt by the Qatari government to curry favor with the American president. But on Monday morning, Leavitt denied that the jet would earn the country special privileges.

READ MORE: During Aviation Crisis Trump Is Shopping for Used Luxury Jet to Replace Air Force One

“They know President Trump and they know he only works with the interests of the American public in mind,” told Brian Kilmeade on Fox News, adding saying the Trump administration and DoD had “[committed] ourselves to the utmost transparency and that the gift was fully legal.

Qatar’s gift to Trump has been controversial with many Americans, including some members of Trump’s base. The far-right influencer Laura Loomer—a longtime ally of the president—called the acceptance of the gift “a stain on the admin” in a post to X (formerly Twitter) on Sunday.

Other critics have said the gift violates the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, which requires government officials to reject gifts unless they get explicit approval from Congress. While a president may accept small, token gifts from leaders, a federal law puts a cap on politicians from receiving gifts worth more than $480.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) said the gift is in clear violation of the emoluments clause, and called on Trump to seek Congress’ approval to take the gift, according to The Hill.

“The Constitution is perfectly clear: no present ‘of any kind whatever’ from a foreign state without Congressional permission,” Raskin said on X. “A gift you use for four years and then deposit in your library is still a gift (and a grift).”

During President Joe Biden’s administration, Trump pushed a conspiracy theory that Biden had offered loan guarantees to Ukraine in exchange for the dismissal of a prosecutor investigating the Burisma energy company. The then-president’s son, Hunter Biden, was a board member of Burisma.

While Trump’s claims were repeatedly debunked, Trump’s first impeachment was over proven reports that Trump blocked a $400 million military aid package to Ukraine—already approved by Congress—in an attempt to get the country to investigate Joe Biden and damage his presidential campaign.

That is not the only time Trump has been accused of making quid pro quo—latin for “this for that”—deals. Earlier this year, comments made by “border czar” Tom Homan on Fox News implied an agreement was made to drop federal charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams  in exchange for his support.

 

Continue Reading

BAD PRESIDENT

What Is a Trade Deficit? Trump’s Main Excuse for Tariffs Isn’t an Actual Problem

Published

on

Much of President Donald Trump’s rhetoric about his on-again/off-again tariff plan is based around the idea that the U.S. is in a trade deficit with many countries around the world. But a deficit isn’t always a bad thing.

On Monday, the White House released a new statement that the U.S. and China had come to an agreement to lower tariffs. Earlier this year, Trump had proposed a 145% tariff against China, and the country retaliated with a proposed 125% tariff on U.S. goods. The new plan sees the tariffs drastically lowered to 30% on imported Chinese goods and 10% on American goods imported into China. The new deal is temporary, lasting 90 days.

“For too long, unfair trade practices and America’s massive trade deficit with China have fueled the offshoring of American jobs and the decline of our manufacturing sector,” the White House said in a statement.

READ MORE: Walz Mocks Trump Not Knowing ‘How a Tariff Works’ as Companies Ready ‘Massive’ Price Hikes

Earlier this year, Trump characterized the United States’ trade deficit with Canada as subsidizing our neighbors to the north. But a trade deficit is just a gap between the amount of goods and services exported and imported to and from a country. For example, the U.S. imports $412.7 billion of goods from Canada while exporting $349.4 billion. While that might look like a $63.3 trade deficit, that doesn’t take into account money coming in the services sector, so our trade deficit with Canada is actually $35.7 billion.

The U.S. has a trade surplus with some countries, too. Brazil buys a lot of energy resources from the U.S., according to the New York Times, but doesn’t sell nearly as many other goods and services back to the states.

The concept of trade deficits and surpluses is wholly neutral—and in fact, a trade deficit can be a good thing.

“America is getting more cheap goods, and in return it is giving foreigners financial assets: dollars issued by the Federal Reserve, bonds from the US government and American corporations, and stocks in newly created firms,” Tarek Alexander Hassan, a professor of economics at Boston University, wrote. “That is, a trade deficit can only arise if foreigners invest more in the US than Americans invest abroad.”

But, of course, sometimes trade deficits can be problematic for a country. If a country has a very large trade deficit for a long time, that can make it more susceptible to the winds of change, according to Jason Furman, who served on the White House Council of Economic Advisors during President Barack Obama’s second term. But, as Furman told NPR, that doesn’t apply to the United States.

Furman also pointed out that while tariffs can be a useful thing, Trump’s tariffs in particular are not.

“Let’s say you wanted to use trade policy to bring manufacturing jobs back. You wouldn’t do what the president just did, which is to put tariffs on all the bananas, mangoes, avocados and coffee coming into the United States. Those just aren’t things that we’re really ever going to make at enormous scale,” he said. “Moreover, the types of things that they do in Vietnam – you know, making clothing, making shoes – that’s not the jobs that we should be aspiring to have in the United States. We don’t want to give up jobs making airplanes in order to have more jobs making shoes.”

Featured image via Reuters

 

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Let That Sink in’: Suspending Habeas Corpus Is on the Table Says Stephen Miller

Published

on

White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller says the White House is “actively” examining suspending habeas corpus, a constitutional protection that supports the right to due process. Critics, including legal experts, reacted strongly, with some noting that this right has only been suspended in the United States four times.

“Well, the Constitution is clear, and that, of course, is the supreme law of the land—that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus can be suspended in a time of invasion,” Miller, the architect of Trump’s child and family separation policy during his first term, told reporters on Friday.

“So I would say that’s an option we’re actively looking at,” Miller declared, before attacking the judicial branch.

“Look, a lot of it depends on whether the courts do the right thing or not.”

READ MORE: ‘Bystander’ Trump Keeps Saying ‘I Don’t Know’ — Critics Ask ‘Who’s in Charge?’

Habeas corpus is a cornerstone of Western democracies, with roots tracing back to the Magna Carta of 1215, which first established the principle that no person could be imprisoned arbitrarily by the king.

Miller, who has no law degree and is not an attorney, went on to give reporters his understanding of constitutional law.

“So,” Miller concluded, “it’s not just the courts aren’t just at war with the executive branch, the courts are at war with these radical judges, with the legislative branch as well, too,” he opined.

“So all of that will inform the choice of the president ultimately makes, yes.”

Critics blasted the extreme suggestion that President Donald Trump has the authority to suspend habeas corpus—Congress does—and that he would attempt to do so when there is no invasion or rebellion, prerequisites mandated by the Constitution.

“Habeas corpus has been suspended only 4 times,” wrote The Washington Post’s Aaron Blake. 1) Civil War 2) When Congress authorized it to combat Ku Klux Klan vigilantism during Reconstruction 3) In the Philippines during a 1905 insurrection 4) In Hawaii after Pearl Harbor.”

“The President lacks the power to suspend habeas corpus under Article II. That power is exclusive to Congress under Article I,” explained civil rights attorney Patrick Jaicomo.

READ MORE: ‘Barely Literate’: Education Secretary’s ‘Deranged’ Letter Gets Major Red Ink Corrections

“Too bad he never went to law school and doesn’t understand the law,” remarked Professor of Law Joyce Vance, the well-known MSNBC legal analyst and former U.S. Attorney.

“Suspending habeas corpus,” noted The Atlantic’s James Surowiecki, “would suspend the right for everyone, not just for undocumented people. So what Stephen Miller is saying here is that Trump is thinking about asserting the right to throw Americans in prison while giving them no opportunity to use the courts to get out.”

“The U.S. Constitution guarantees due process to everyone within the United States, not just citizens. They’re inventing a fake ‘invasion’ to call for an emergency and give themselves more power,” added political strategist Max Flugrath, Communications Director at Fair Fight Action.

“Don’t even think about it,” remarked U.S. Senator Ed Markey (D-MA).

The well-known attorney George Conway, saying it “can’t be overstated,” called Miller “deeply, deeply disturbed.”

“Suspending habeas corpus. Let that sink in,” commented The Lincoln Project.

Former Democratic National Committee chairman Jaime Harrison described Miller’s threatening remarks as “dictatorial b——.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Total Injustice’: Pope Leo XIV Likely to Weigh in on Trump-Era Policies, Brother Hints

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.