Thursday, January 16, 2025. Joe Biden's farewell address, Chump's nominees, a fake ass leaves Congress, and much more.
Last night, President Joe Biden gave his farewell address to the American people. It's a historic speech that will live on and often be cited. When President Dwight D. Eisenhower gave a similar speech, it registered to a degree but it was the years that followed -- and the missed opportunities to heed Eisenhower's warnings -- that made it so historic. Hopefully, we'll heed this president's warnings.
President Joe Biden: My fellow Americans, I’m speaking to you tonight from the Oval Office. Before I begin, let me speak to important news from earlier today. After eight months of nonstop negotiation, my administration -- by my administration -- a cease-fire and a hostage deal has been reached by Israel and Hamas, the elements of which I laid out in great detail in May of this year.
This plan was developed and negotiated by my team, and it will be largely implemented by the incoming administration. That’s why I told my team to keep the incoming administration fully informed. Because that’s how it should be: Working together as Americans. This will be my final address to you, the American people, from the Oval Office, from this desk, as president. And I’ve been thinking a lot about who we are and, maybe more importantly, who we should be.
Long ago, in New York Harbor, an ironworker installed beam after beam, day after day. He was joined by steel workers, stonemasons, engineers. They built not just a single structure, but a beacon of freedom. The very idea of America was so big, we felt the entire world needed to see the Statue of Liberty, a gift from France after our Civil War. Like the very idea of America, it was built not by one person but by many people, from every background, and from around the world.
Like America, the Statue of Liberty is not standing still. Her foot literally steps forward atop a broken chain of human bondage. She’s on the march. And she literally moves. She was built to sway back and forth to withstand the fury of stormy weather, to stand the test of time because storms are always coming. She sways a few inches, but she never falls into the current below. An engineering marvel.
The Statue of Liberty is also an enduring symbol of the soul of our nation, a soul shaped by forces that bring us together and by forces that pull us apart. And yet, through good times and tough times, we have withstood it all. A nation of pioneers and explorers, of dreamers and doers, of ancestors native to this land, of ancestors who came by force. A nation of immigrants who came to build a better life. A nation holding the torch of the most powerful idea ever in the history of the world: that all of us, all of us are created equal. That all of us deserve to be treated with dignity, justice and fairness. That democracy must defend, and be defined, and be imposed, moved in every way possible: Our rights, our freedoms, our dreams. But we know the idea of America, our institution, our people, our values that uphold it, are constantly being tested.
Ongoing debates about power and the exercise of power. About whether we lead by the example of our power or the power of our example. Whether we show the courage to stand up to the abuse of power, or we yield to it. After 50 years at the center of all of this, I know that believing in the idea of America means respecting the institutions that govern a free society -- the presidency, the Congress, the courts, a free and independent press. Institutions that are rooted -- not just reflect the timeless words, but they -- they echo the words of the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident.” Rooted in the timeless words of the Constitution: "We the People." Our system of separation of powers, checks and balances -- it may not be perfect, but it's maintained our democracy for nearly 250 years, longer than any other nation in history that's ever tried such a bold experiment.
In the past four years, our democracy has held strong. And every day, I’ve kept my commitment to be president for all Americans, through one of the toughest periods in our nation’s history. I’ve had a great partner in Vice President Kamala Harris. It’s been the honor of my life to see the resilience of essential workers getting us through a once-in-a-century pandemic, the heroism of service members and first responders keeping us safe, the determination of advocates standing up for our rights and our freedoms.
Instead of losing their jobs to an economic crisis that we inherited, millions of Americans now have the dignity of work. Millions of entrepreneurs and companies, creating new businesses and industries, hiring American workers, using American products. And together, we have launched a new era of American possibilities: one of the greatest modernizations of infrastructure in our entire history, from new roads, bridges, clean water, affordable high-speed internet for every American.
We invented the semiconductor, smaller than the tip of my little finger, and now is bringing those chip factories and those jobs back to America where they belong, creating thousands of jobs. Finally giving Medicare the power to negotiate lower prescription drug prices for millions of seniors. And finally doing something to protect our children and our families by passing the most significant gun safety law in 30 years. And bringing violent crime to a 50-year low. Meeting our sacred obligation to over one million veterans so far who were exposed to toxic materials, and to their families, providing medical care and education benefits and more for their families.
You know, it will take time to feel the full impact of all we’ve done together. But the seeds are planted, and they’ll grow, and they’ll bloom for decades to come. At home, we have created nearly 17 million new jobs, more than any other single administration in a single term. More people have health care than ever before. And overseas, we have strengthened NATO. Ukraine is still free. And we’ve pulled ahead in our competition with China. And so much more. I’m so proud of how much we’ve accomplished together for the American people, and I wish the incoming administration success. Because I want America to succeed.
That’s why I’ve upheld my duty to ensure a peaceful and orderly transition of power to ensure we lead by the power of our example. I have no doubt that America is in a position to continue to succeed.
That’s why my farewell address tonight, I want to warn the country of some things that give me great concern. And this is a dangerous — and that’s the dangerous concentration of power in the hands of a very few ultrawealthy people, and the dangerous consequences if their abuse of power is left unchecked. Today, an oligarchy is taking shape in America of extreme wealth, power and influence that literally threatens our entire democracy, our basic rights and freedoms and a fair shot for everyone to get ahead. We see the consequences all across America. And we’ve seen it before.
More than a century ago, the American people stood up to the robber barons back then and busted the trusts. They didn’t punish the wealthy. They just made the wealthy play by the rules everybody else had. Workers want rights to earn their fair share. You know, they were dealt into the deal, and it helped put us on the path to building the largest middle class, the most prosperous century any nation the world has ever seen. We’ve got to do that again.
The last four years, that is exactly what we have done. People should be able to make as much as they can, but pay — play by the same rules, pay their fair share in taxes. So much is at stake. Right now, the existential threat of climate change has never been clearer. Just look across the country, from California to North Carolina. That’s why I signed the most significant climate and clean energy law ever, ever in the history of the world.
And the rest of the world is trying to model it now. It’s working, creating jobs and industries of the future. Now we have proven we don’t have to choose between protecting the environment and growing the economy. We’re doing both. But powerful forces want to wield their unchecked influence to eliminate the steps we’ve taken to tackle the climate crisis, to serve their own interests for power and profit. We must not be bullied into sacrificing the future, the future of our children and our grandchildren. We must keep pushing forward, and push faster. There is no time to waste. It is also clear that American leadership in technology is unparalleled, an unparalleled source of innovation that can transform lives. We see the same dangers in the concentration of technology, power and wealth.
You know, in his farewell address, President Eisenhower spoke of the dangers of the military-industrial complex. He warned us that about, and I quote, “The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power.” Six days — six decades later, I’m equally concerned about the potential rise of a tech-industrial complex that could pose real dangers for our country as well.
Americans are being buried under an avalanche of misinformation and disinformation enabling the abuse of power. The free press is crumbling. Editors are disappearing. Social media is giving up on fact-checking. The truth is smothered by lies told for power and for profit. We must hold the social platforms accountable to protect our children, our families and our very democracy from the abuse of power. Meanwhile, artificial intelligence is the most consequential technology of our time, perhaps of all time.
Nothing offers more profound possibilities and risks for our economy, and our security, our society. For humanity. Artificial intelligence even has the potential to help us answer my call to end cancer as we know it. But unless safeguards are in place, A.I. could spawn new threats to our rights, our way of life, to our privacy, how we work, and how we protect our nation. We must make sure A.I. is safe and trustworthy and good for all humankind.
In the age of A.I., it’s more important than ever that the people must govern. And as the Land of Liberty, America — not China — must lead the world in the development of A.I.
You know, in the years ahead, it’s going to be up to the president, the presidency, the Congress, the courts, the free press, and the American people to confront these powerful forces. We must reform the tax code. Not by giving the biggest tax cuts to billionaires, but by making them begin to pay their fair share.
We need to get dark money — that’s that hidden funding behind too many campaign contributions — we need to get it out of our politics. We need to enact an 18-year time limit, term limit, time and term, for the strongest ethics — and the strongest ethics reforms for our Supreme Court. We need to ban members of Congress from trading stock while they are in the Congress. We need to amend the Constitution to make clear that no president, no president is immune from crimes that he or she commits while in office. The president’s power is not limit — it is not absolute. And it shouldn’t be.
And in a democracy, there is another danger — that the concentration of power and wealth. It erodes a sense of unity and common purpose. It causes distrust and division. Participating in our democracy becomes exhausting and even disillusioning, and people don’t feel like they have a fair shot. We have to stay engaged in the process. I know it’s frustrating. A fair shot is what makes America America. Everyone is entitled to a fair shot, not a guarantee, just a fair shot, an even playing field. Going as far as your hard work and talent can take you.
We can never lose that essential truth to remain who we are. I’ve always believed, and I told other world leaders, America will be defined by one word: possibilities. Only in America do we believe anything is possible. Like a kid with a stutter from modest beginnings in Scranton, Pennsylvania, and Claymont, Delaware, sitting behind this desk in the Oval Office as president of the United States.
That is the magic of America. It’s all around us. Upstairs in the residence of the White House, I’ve walked by a painting of a Statue of Liberty I don’t how many times. In the painting there are several workers climbing on the outstretched arm of the statue that holds the torch. It reminds me every day I pass it of the story and soul of our nation, and the power of the American people.
There is a story of a veteran — a veteran, a son of an immigrant, whose job was to climb that torch and polish the amber panes so rays of light could reach out as far as possible. He was known as the keeper of the flame. He once said of the Statue of Liberty, “Speaks a silent, universal language, one of hope that anyone who seeks and speaks freedom can understand.”
Yes, we sway back and forth to withstand the fury of the storm, to stand the test of time, a constant struggle, constant struggle. A short distance between peril and possibility. But what I believe is the America of our dreams is always closer than we think. And it’s up to us to make our dreams come true.
Let me close by stating my gratitude to so many people. To the members of my administration, as well as public service and first responders across the country and around the world, thank you for stepping up to serve. To our service members and their families, it has been the highest honor of my life to lead you as commander in chief.
And of course, to Kamala and her incredible partner. A historic vice president. She and Doug have become like family. And to me, family is everything.
My deepest appreciation to our amazing first lady who is with me in the Oval today. For our entire family. You are the love of my life and the life of my love.
My eternal thanks to you, the American people. After 50 years of public service, I give you my word, I still believe in the idea for which this nation stands — a nation where the strength of our institutions and the character of our people matter and must endure. Now it’s your turn to stand guard. May you all be the keeper of the flame. May you keep the faith. I love America. You love it, too.
God bless you all, and may God protect our troops. Thank you for this great honor.
Following the speech last night, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes, Joy Reid, Jen Psaki, and Alex Wagner offered their takes on the speech.
I'm really not interested in other so-called 'analysis.'
Whose life actually matters? One idiot said. Well, Joe was president of the United States. So the American people are who matter. That's your first priority. I'm not interested in your bulls**t.
That includes flake Mike who's about to be cut off here. I'm just not interested in garbage. The cease-fire? It's not. And it never was. This is not a new development. We called out the press for over a year on that. If anything takes place now, it's nothing but a pause.
Now let's deal with some more reality.
I defended the Palestinian people here. My arguments were about them. I called out collective punishment and, as someone who has studied "just war" theory, I made the case that way.
I did not defend Hamas. I did note that there was a blur due to the civilian element of Hamas -- which is in charge of the government in Gaza -- and a lot of people didn't get that.
Is there a political justification to be made for the October 7th attack? Sure, there is. And some may go along and some may not. But if you recognize that there is a political justification for the attack, you also need to recognize that there was never a justification to hold people hostage -- and to do for months and months. That is terrorism by any definition.
Too many commentators on YOUTUBE, at COMMON DREAMS, THE NATION, DEMOCRACY NOW! and elsewhere did not draw a line. What they did was make a case for terrorism.
And all that did was embolden the Gaza Freaks (Americans who are idiots and would rather scream and yell then actually work towards helping anyone -- the CODESTINKERS who show up at hearings and disrupt to get media attention for themselves as opposed to building any serious resistance to a poor nominee for Secretary of Defense). And then the Gaza Freaks attempted to hold the Democratic Party hostage.
The Gaza Freaks attacked Black womon on Tik-Tok -- as Tabitha at TABITHA SPEAKS documented repeatedly in the lead up to the election.
Last night, Joe Biden addressed the American people.
And you can see the Gaza Freaks out in full force.
The United States is in for a tough for years.
But by all means, focus on the first two paragraphs of Joe's speech. By all means, make that your entire overly long YOUTUBE video.
This is why Americans no longer care to the degree that they did this time last year.
Gaza is the priority of Gaza. Grasp that.
It's not the priority of the United States.
Again, I defended the Palestinian people who were the victims of collective punishment. I never defended the violent actions of Hamas.
The Gaza Freaks turn off the American people and they have turned them off. I see on campus after campus.
Joe spoke to the American people about issues having to do with the United States because he is the US president.
I don't need your garbage about Gaza or 'this isn't a cease-fire!' -- no, it's probably not. I haven't looked over the details because I honestly don't care. It's most likely a pause which is all anyone was ever fighting for or hoped for. It will most likely take some attention off the issues -- although most Americans have already tuned it out. When the heat is off, Netanyahu will again attack the Palestinian people.
A cease-fire was never the answer. A cease-fire was a step, a true cease-fire, but it was never going to be the answer.
Gaza Freaks embarrassed themselves and have angered the American people with their bulls**t that helped elect Donald Trump. Gaza Freaks are racists who proudly posted racist attacks on Black women online.
And there was never any calling out from THE NATION or DEMOCRACY NOW! or any of the other dirt poor jerks that turn around and beg you for money because the reality is that their work isn't good enough for them to live off of. It's a Circle Jerk that they plan behind the scenes. DSA claims credit online and to the press for Tim Walz getting on the ticket as the vice presidential candidate and the same useless outlets attacking Kamala (from the 'left') run articles praising Tim.
It's not journalism, it's Socialist propaganda.
You exposed yourself then and you're exposing yourself now. We may be dropping someone soon. I've noted before that there is a fiery speaker we'd been highlighting for some time. And I noted that we might be dropping them because I'd just discovered they were good friends with Lie Face.
Lie Face went around lying in 2008. She got banned from PBS as a result. Ava and I presented the evidence of her lies -- and her attacks on her students -- to the college administration she was at and she was let go as a result. Amy Goodman was part of the cabal who hid who Lie Face was when she brought Lie Face on her show.
Lie Face went all over the media lying that she was just a political analyst, a professor, had no skin in the game. She did this throughout 2008. Despite the fact that she joined Barack's campaign in 2007.
I don't like liars, tricksters or whores.
Lie Face's friend did a video. And I posted it. It's the only time I've ever deleted something.
If that's what we're going to be seeing from Lie Face's friend, we won't be seeing her videos up here anymore.
We have an American nightmare that's about to last a minimum for four years. If we're lucky. And the inability of the American 'left' to fight for the American people in 2024 is disgusting. I'm not in the mood for you or your nonsense.
Gaza is not a US state. It is not part of North America.
The tricksters have turned off Americans to this issue and I'm not going to help this issue. I will not stand with the likes of racist Susan ('Medea') Benjamin. And on that trash, please see Mike's "Idiot of the Week Susan ('Medea') Benjamin and CODESTINK" -- read that and grasp that those of us who rightly call out fundamentalists creeps for screaming when a natural disaster hits that it's God's punishment -- no difference between that and Susan and CODESTINK trying to say that the plight of the people of Gaza are the reason for the wildfires in California.
As some point, we all ready have to say, "That's enough. That's more than enough."
I hope we get to the hearings but we may not because I need to address a few things. I noted that we'd be changing from "Iraq snapshot" to "The snapshot" and we do today and I'll get to that.
An e-mail to the public account insists that Nancy Pelosi and Jill Biden are in "a catfight." And that I refuse to comment.
I'll comment because Jill's leaving the White House in a few days. I do know Jill. When Joe was vice president, we didn't note her hear. I said before Joe was sworn in as vice president, that I wouldn't be commenting on Jill because if the media tried to blow something up, I wanted to stay neutral here.
There is no catfight between Jill and Nancy. I'm sorry to disappoint your sexist desires but there's not one.
Jill is disappointed with Nancy. She feels let down and betrayed.
I think Ava and I dealt with it in July -- the push by the public to start demanding that Jill tell Joe to step down. I know it's at THIRD, it may be in a snapshot as well. But the argument we made was that people needed to back off. Jill is Joe's wife of many decades. It is not her job to tell Joe to step down. Her marriage is her business. She certainly doesn't owe it to Joe to tell him to step down if she doesn't think he needs to.
She is upset that Nancy called for it privately.
That's her right to be upset.
Nancy Pelosi did not call publicly -- a lie the press went with in real time. Had she done what they said and August featured a contested convention nominee, Nancy couldn't have voted. There are rules and sadly the US press never learns a damn thing about what they write about. General studies majors passed off as informed on everything.
Nancy did press Joe privately to step down.
Nancy was right to do that. Her focus was on the country. That's more than fine, Joe's her spouse.
This is not a case where one of the two women is right and the other is wrong. This is where two women had different roles and did what they did to fulfill those roles.
Jill and Nancy were not friends. They were never as close as Jill thinks they were. Jill's a warm person who makes friends very easily. Nancy's guarded and, yes, cold.
There is no "catfight." They'll both go on with their lives.
Joe Biden is leaving the White House. US troops are still in Iraq.
He should have pulled them.
He should have. He didn't. He couldn't after Afghanistan. The backlash there, as we noted in real time, was garbage and lies.
How many decades did those trashing Joe want US troops on the ground in Afghanistan?
And for what reason?
They needed to be brought home. Joe was the grown up in the room who did that -- not Bully Boy Bush, not Barack Obama, not Donald Trump -- who went into his first term insisting he was opposed to the Iraq War.
US troops remain on the ground in Iraq.
Did I miss Barbie Lee on that?
Brave Barbie Lee?
Barbara Lee was the biggest fake ass in Congress. As someone who knew her before she got into Congress, I'm well aware of how she lies non-stop about her own life and how she's repeatedly changed and altered her life history -- even details about her birth.
And that wouldn't matter so much if she'd been honest politically.
But this is one of the chair's of the Out of Iraq caucus.
And she's finally out of Congress.
And US troops remain in Iraq.
Did I miss her big exit speech where she tackled that issue?
No.
She ignored it and the press let her get away with it.
She's infamous for voting against the authorization for the war on Afghanistan. The only member of Congress who did.
And she got repeatedly praised for that over the years.
So what"
She voted once before it started and then did nothing other than offering empty words year after year.
The empty words stopped once Barack was elected president.
At that time, she said she wasn't going to press him on the issue in 2009, he was feeling his way. Then she offered another excuse for why she wasn't going to press him on the issue in 2010. And then . . .
She never pressed him.
Barbara Lee made a lot of big statements against both wars but, in the end, that's all they were: Words.
Empty words at that.
We kept attention on Iraq here. Barbara -- a co-chair of the Out of Iraq Caucus in the House -- lost interest in 2008. And she never made her way back. But she had a bad book to sell, remember?
She's a fake ass. And that and being 78 years old is why we opposed her run for the Senate last year.
She accomplished nothing but she sure did get a lot of attention from left and 'left' sites. A lot of praise that she never earned. And a reputation she never lived up to.
I was hoping to do some hearing coverage but we don't have room, this is already too long.
Ultimately,
no Republican senators have said they would oppose her nomination,
though Sen. John Curtis of Utah and Sen. Susan Collins of Maine claim
they’re still making up their minds.
And if any do ultimately vote against her, Trump megadonor, adviser and “First Buddy” Elon Musk has indicated his support for primary challenges against Republican senators who don’t fall in line on Trump’s Cabinet nominees.
I want to start with that because do people believe it?
I don't doubt that weirdo Elon Musk will try to buy revenge. He's a coward and can only come at people with money.
But
my point here is does Susan Collins believe she's vulnerable. She may
be. But not due to Elon. She's 72. Age might be an issue for her --
if so, that's with or without Elon. But Elon attacking her and funding
an opponent?
That's a
winning strategy for a smart candidate. AIPAC took out Cori Bush, for
example, and that's in part because she didn't make a big deal about it.
"Us,"
that's how you bond with the voter. It's you and the voter fighting
off the bad people. So Susan and the voter fighting off this
tri-national freak Elon Musk. That's a fundraiser all be itself and a
get-out-the-vote.
Maine -- true of any state -- doesn't want some foreign blowhard interfering in their elections and trying to buy votes.
"This
South African man thinks he's going to dictate to us? We're going to
stand together and show him that Maine isn't for sale!"
Again,
if you've got brains a threat like that from Musk is your re-election
tool. I have no idea why Cori did not play that card. Voters do not
want outsiders coming in and trying to tell them what to do.
So
I'm just wondering is there anyone in the Senate foolish enough to
believe that Elon has the power to get them ejected in an election? And
if he tried it on multiple senators it would be even better because it
would demonstrate that he truly does not have that kind of power. A
voter in Maine might hate Congress -- both houses -- but that same voter
is generally predisposed to like their own representatives. That's
part of the power of incumbency.
Staying with the topic of Chump's nominees, Joe Sommerlad (INDEPENDENT) reports,
"South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem, Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), has had her Senate confirmation
hearing abruptly postponed by two days. Governor Noem had been due to be
grilled by senators from the chamber’s Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs Committee on Wednesday about her suitability for
the role." And then there's Pam Bondi. Who? Chump's nominee for
Attorney General. Excuse me. Chump's second nominee for Attorney
General. Remember, he's still not been sworn in but Trump's first
nominee for Attorney General is already a distant memory. Matt Gaetz
killed by the Congressional report that found drug use, sex with an
underage girl -- which is also known as rape -- and much, much more.
Bondi had her confirmation hearing yesterday. Liam Archacki (DAILY BEAST) notes:
Pam
Bondi fell silent, refusing to answer, when a senator pressed her on
whether Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential election. The confirmation
hearing for Donald Trump’s pick for attorney general was dominated by
questions about Bondi’s independence from the president-elect. But
perhaps none of her responses was more telling than one she offered to
Marie Hirono, a Democrat from Hawaii.
“I want to ask you a factual question,” Hirono began. “Who won the 2020 presidential election?”
“Joe
Biden is the president of the United States,” responded Bondi, refusing
to contradict the false claim maintained by Trump that the election was
rigged against him.
“I can say that Donald
Trump won the 2024 election. I may not like it, but I can say it. You
cannot say who won the 2020 election,” Hirono fired back.
Bondi, looking at the senator, pursed her lips and said nothing.
“It’s disturbing that you can’t give voice to that fact,” Hirono said.
The
link we're using goes to BING. I don't know if THE DAILY BEAST made
the mistake or BING did but there's no Senator Marie Hirono. The name
is Mazie Hirono. Morgan Music (LATIN TIMES) adds,
"During Wednesday's tense Senate confirmation hearing for Attorney
General nominee Pam Bondi, Bondi repeatedly declined to say if she would
investigate Special Counsel Jack Smith and former Congresswoman Liz
Cheney." She refused to answer. At one point, she refused by insisting
that it was a hypothetical.
Senator
Marco Rubio had his confirmation hearing yesterday. Chump's nominated
him for Secretary of State. We're not going to spend any time on that
hearing. It's wasted time. That's not a judgment for or against Marco.
It's acknowledging that the Senate confirms their own. It's not new,
it's not novel, it's just the way it is. So we're not going to spend
any time on it. Others can if they like, but it's a done deal.
Let's wind down with Lawrence O'Donnell's take on Joe's farewell address.
Wednesday, January 15, 2025. Pete Hegseth demonstrated yesterday that he is not fit to be the Secretary of Defense -- that's the main point today. We'll also point out taxation without representation -- something that led to the forming of the United States and something Republicans are now threatening to do to California.
Before anything else, let's deal with YOUTUBE and some
other nonsense. Two different people e-mailed the public account
(common_ills@yahoo.com) about why their YOUTUBE program was being
ignored? It wasn't. If you tick me off, I'll say so. The problem is
YOUTUBE. That full page of YOUTUBE this week has been very little of
what I subscribe to. I subscribe to most of the programs we highlight
to help their numbers. This week, most of that is not showing up.
MEIDASTOUCH NEWS, for example. I have to search it in YOUTUBE because
it has no longer been showing up on my main page. Instead, I'm getting
all this British garbage -- anti-trans garbage, pro-Elon Musk garbage --
and Brazilian garbage (Glenneth Greenwald). I'm getting a ton of FOX
"NEWS" as well. I did search how to block on YOUTUBE. The directions
were wrong. On the main page where you have all your tiny squares,
click on the right three dots and you will get the block function. You
will not get -- or I didn't -- by following the directions and going to
the show's page and looking for those three dots.
I'm
really not in the mood for garbage. THE HUMANIST isn't being dropped
or blocked. But it was a garbage program yesterday. And I left a
comment noting that.
TIK-TOK.
Oh, Saltine, your problems be so heavy.
It
might be consumer interest factoid but it's not news. And it's
certainly not news when Elon Musk and his fellow sewer dwellers are
producing anti-trans, anti-LGBTQ+ videos over and over -- that was my
entire YOUTUBE page even when I refreshed repeatedly -- or when Hegseth
has his confirmation hearing or when marriage equality is already under
attack or when we're days away from Chump being sworn back in with
Chump's plan to start deportations on day one or when my state that
gives so much more in taxes is being threatened that we won't see
federal aid . . Sorry, Mike, but grow the f**k up. TIK-TOK? That's
your contribution to discourse in the public square?
Here's
one I haven't seen. Trump is trying to bring back the Boston Tea
Party. What do I mean? We're taxed in California. And now they're
threatening to withhold aid? I believe that started the American
revolution: Taxation without representation.
Do
we not get that? These people trying to impose conditions on federal
aid after we've paid our taxes and some threatening to withhold federal
aid after we've paid our taxes.
That's taxation without representation.
Why can't you talk about that or something that honestly matters?
This is what that nonsense says to me, you're not serious.
Oh, it's news! It's news!
It's a single sentence.
Let
me demonstrate: Congress received more letters complaining about the
move to ban saccharine then they received against the Vietnam War.
That is a fact.
It's a single sentence news. A headline. Well, a headline and a hilarious Gilda Radner skit.
If TIK-TOK is your biggest
problem -- it being banned -- I'm so sorry that the vast and
never-ending world of infotainment is not enough for your gluttony.
Ro
Khanna is a stooge and Mike can take comfort in the fact that, as a
member of Congress, Ro obsessing over TIK-TOK looks far worse for him.
But you're both playing while Rome burns. The country survived the end
of MySpace, I'm sure they can handle TIKTOK. A second term of Chump? I
think we'll have to be really focused and work really hard to survive
that.
If
I'm lucky when we're on the road speaking or attending hearings, I've
got 30 minutes for lunch and if I'm really lucky I've got ten of those
minutes to post several hours of YOUTUBE videos. If I'm not lucky?
Someone's coming up to my table for a photo or to share something in
their life or an autograph or whatever. So I really don't have time to
hit refresh over and over and over. I know MEIDASTOUCH NEWS posts
several times a day so I will search for them. Otherwise, if you're not
showing on the main YOUTUBE page, I just assume you're not posting. So
if anyone besides the two who e-mailed have felt ignored, that's
probably what happened.
The hearing yesterday was
brought to order by Committee Chair Roger Wicker who struggles with
speech and the English language. I haven't been so uncomfortable
hearing a Committee member speak since disgraced Corrine Brown left the
House of Representatives and did a prison stint. Like Corrine, Roger
struggles with the most basic of words -- "contributions" to cite but
one example -- if you need another "colleagues" and by the time he
mangles "candidacy" (can-a-day) and mispronounced "ethos" I was done
with the idiot. My life will not be wasted trying to accurately portray
the stupidity flying out of his mouth.
He also
reads poorly. There's no excuse for stumbling over your own prepared
opening statement that you're reading off a piece of paper. There's
also no excuse for stumbling over someone's name as though you've come
across it for the first time. David Bellavia is a name he knew he
was going to pronounce since it was in his prepared statement and since
he was quoting from Bellavia's letter endorsing Hegseth.
The
first question that comes to mind is how did such an idiot get made
Committee Chair? But then you think a moment and grasp how MAGA has
infected and destroyed the GOP and you grasp that Wicker's Committee
Chair because he is, sadly, the best that the party has.
Ranking
Member Jack Reed used his opening remarks to make clear that he could
not support Hegseth's nomination. He noted he had previously voted in
favor of every Secretary of Defense nominees including the two Donald
Chump nominated in his first term. To clarify, that would be Mark Esper
and Jim Mattis. We have to clarify that because in his first term,
Chump left the office vacant. Esper replaced Mattis in July of 2019 and
then left November 9, 2020 when Chump fired him. There was no real
Secretary of Defense from November 9, 2020 to the end of Chumps term
(January 20, 2021). Chump cared so little about the military and the
defense of the United States that he fired a Secretary of Defense and
then left the position open. (Christopher Miller would be acting
Secretary of Defense which isn't the same thing -- it's a tactic that
thug Nouri al-Maliki perfected when he was prime minister of Iraq -- it
let Nouri control things but it didn't protect the Iraqi people.)
Reed
also expressed his surprise and disappointment over the fact that
Hegseth refused to meet with any Democratic Party members of the
Committee other than Reed. During her time, Senator Jeanne
Shaheen would also note the refusal to meet with Democratic senators
other than Reed. She pointed out that this was not the case in the
previous Trump administration and it wasn't the case under other
presidents. She's served on the Committee for eleven years.
Senator Jeanne Shaheen: Do
you understand that if you're confirmed to be Secretary of Defense,
that you will have a responsibility to meet with all members of this Committee, not just Republicans?
Pete
Hegseth: Senator, I very much appreciate and understand the
traditionally bipartisan nature of this Committee. There -- National
defense is not p-partisan. It should not be about Republicans or
Democrats.
Shaheen
noted that, had they been able to meet before the hearing, she was going
to discuss the issue of women in the military with him.
Senator Jeanne Shaheen: Because
you've made a number of surprising statements about women serving in
the military. As recently as November 7, 2024 on THE SHAWN RYAN SHOW
you said, and I quote, "I'm straight up saying that we should not have
women in combat roles. It hasn't made us more effective." The quote
went on a little bit longer but that was the gist of it. That was
before you were nominated to be Secretary of Defense. Mr Hegseth, do you
know what percentage of our military is comprised of women?
Pete Hegseth: Uh, [shaking his head 'no'] I believe it's 18 to 20 percent, Senator.
Senator:
Jeanne Shaheen: It's almost 18 percent and DoD's 2023 demographic
report indicated that there are more women serving now and there are
fewer separations. So they make up a critical part of our military,
wouldn't you agree?
Pete
Hegseth: Yes, ma'am. Women in our military -- as I've said publicly --
have and continue to make amazing contributions across all aspects of
our battlefield.
Jeanne
Shaheen: Well you also write in your book THE WAR ON WARRIORS with the
chapter "The Deadly Obsession With Women Warriors," that "Not only are
women comparatively less effective than men in combat roles, but
they are more likely to be objectified by the enemy and their own nation
in the moral realms of war." Mr Hegseth, should we take it to believe
that you believe that the two women on this Committee who have served
honorably and with distinction, made our military less effective and
less capable?
Pete Hegseth: I'm
incredibly grateful for the two -- two women that served our military in
uniform and including in the Central Intelligence Agency contributions
on the battlefield -- uh-uh --
Pete Hegseth: Senator I would like to clarify
[crosstalk]
Pete Hegseth: -- effects readiness which is what I care about the most
Jeanne Shaheen: I understand --
Pete Hegseth: -- readiness
[cross talk]
Senator Jeanne Shaheen: Your
statements publicly have not been to that effect. After your
nomination you did say to a group of reporters that you "support all
women serving in our military today who do a fantastic job across the
globe including combat." So what I'm confused about, Mr Hegseth, which
is it? Why should women in our military, if you were the Secretary of
Defense, believe that they would have a fair shot and an equal
opportunity to rise through the ranks? If on the one hand, you say that
women are not competent, they make our military less effective and on
the other hand you say 'Oh, no, now that I've been nominated to be the
Secretary of Defense, I've changed my view on women in the military
what do you have to say to the almost 400,000 women who are serving
today about your position on whether they should be capable to rise
through the highest ranks of our military.
He talks nonsense and then she asks him if he's familiar with a law, The Women Peace and Security Agenda?
Pete Hegseth: Yes, ma'am, I am.
Senator
Jeanne Shaheen: This is a law that was signed during president-elect
Trump's first term. It was legislation that I sponsored with Republican
Senator Capato of West Virginia. It was co-sponsored by Marco Rubio,
the nominee for to be the president elect's Secretary of State. It was
led in the House of Representatives by Kristi Noam, the president
elect's nominee to be the Secretary of Homeland Security. It mandates
that women be included in all aspects of our national security including
conflict resolution and peace negotiations. And at the Dept of
Defense, it has been the law under both the Trump and Biden
administrations. The DoD has incorporated women throughout its decision
making as a result. Every single combatant commander across two
administrations has told this Committee that this law and its
implementation at the Dept of Defense provides them a strategic
advantage operationally. Based on your comments, it appears that the
example you would like to set not only for women in this country but for
women across the globe, 50% of the world's population as the
prospective nominee to lead the most combat credible military in the
entire world is that women should not have an equal opportunity in our
military. So will you commit to preserving The Women Peace and Security
Agenda law at DoD and including in your budget the requisite funding to
continue and resource these programs throughout the DoD.
Pete
Hegseth: Senator, I will commit to reviewing that program and ensuring
it alings with America First national securities priorities,
meritocracy, legality and readiness. And if it advances American
interests, it's something we would advance. If it doesn't, it's
something will look at it.
Senator Jeanne Shaheen: Since former president Trump signed the law, I hope he agrees with you.
Right there, he demonstrates that he is not qualified to serve in any federal government capacity.
I don't know why the Sheehan exchange is not what the press ran with.
Do you understand the two sentences I just dictated?
I hope you do but Hegseth doesn't.
Now he evaded and he lied throughout. And after we saw what Trump's Supreme Court Justices did -- despite lies that they told in their confirmation hearings -- that should be troubling. I'm not rolling that out. His sexism and his stupidity was on display throught and I believe Senator Tammy Duckworth more than established that in her questioning.
But stop everything for just a moment.
For a nominee to tell a Senate confirmation committee anything other than "Yes, I will" when asked if they will follow the law?
That's disqualfying.
I really don't care what the drunk thinks about the law.
It is the law.
If confirmed, he would have to take an oath to uphold the law.
As a Cabinet Secretary, he does not get to pick and choose what laws to follow. Nor does he make law.
Congress does. They passed the law in 2017, Trump signed it into law.
It's now the law of the land.
And yet the drunk sat there sweating through his hearing and asked if he would follow the law, he responded that he would have to review it to make sure it fits with his own beliefs.
That's not how the law works.
I'm sure many crooks wish it did work that way. 'Yes, I killed the man but, your honor, I don't believe in the law that murder is a crime.'
It doesn't work that way.
The law is the law.
And for a Cabinet nominee to sit in front of a Senate committee insisting he's qualified for a job and yet to also insist that he'd have to look at a law to determine whether or not he would follow it?
That's not the way it works.
With that response, just that one exchange, he is unfit to serve.
There are many, many other reasons but with just that, he's unfit to serve.
When you're nominated to a federal post, your confirmation begins and ends on whether or not you will follow the law. If you say you have to review it, then you don't know enough about government to serve in it.
He could have easily said, "I don't agree with it but it's the law. Therefore I will follow it." Or, "I don't agree with it but I will follow it while I advocate for Congress to change it."
But to say you need to review the law before you can decide whether or not to follow it?
That's an immediate disqualifier.
Once Congress passed it and a president signed it into law, you don't get a choice. That he doesn't grasp that goes to how immensely unqualified he is. We do not have time, as a country, to wait for someone to give him a basic high school tutorial on how the government works. He's not fit for the job and shouldn't be confirmed.
The
key thread of the hearing was Hegseth's refusal to answer questions.
He'd hem and he'd haw and he'd pretend not to remember -- such as with
regards to the woman he previously admitted to having sex with but
insisted he didn't rape her (though he paid her a six figure settlement
and made her sign a NDA -- and even the most basic questions that
required only a "yes" or a "no" were sidestepped by him.
Senator
Elizabeth Warren, for example, noted that he had gone on record
sometime ago with his belief that retiring generals should have to wait
ten years after retirement before going to work in the private
(corporate) defense industry. Would he himself follow that guideline?
He wouldn't answer. At one point, he thought he was so cute, he
informed Warren that he was not a general. No, and he was not cute.
That greasy hair is disgusting. FOX "NEWS" didn't let him go on air
like that. Is it because he keeps sweating? Is that why he's doing the
greasy, wet look?
Would he pledge to follow that guideline if he was confirmed?
Like Elizabeth Warren, we were all left without an answer.
He'd
just avoid answering. Warren noted that this was on top of his refusal
to meet with her when they could have discussed before the hearing.
The
hearing moved on down the line with the GOP grinning manically - Wicker
had everyone else beat in that area -- and refusing to tackle any real
issues. For the Democrats? Hegseth repeatedly refused to answer
questions -- even those requiring either a "yes" or a "no" -- and he
came across with all the integrity of a used car salesman.
After the hearing, Senator Reed issued the following statement:
“I went into today’s hearing with deep concerns about Mr. Hegseth’s
qualifications to be Secretary of Defense, and my fears were confirmed.
He lacks the requisite character, competence, and commitment to do this
job. Indeed, he is the least qualified nominee for Secretary of Defense
in modern history.
“In addition to his own alarming statements, there are simply too
many disturbing reports about Mr. Hegseth to ignore. A variety of
sources accuse him of disregarding the laws of war, financial
mismanagement, racist and sexist remarks, alcohol abuse, sexual assault,
sexual harassment, and other troubling issues.
“If a servicemember had the same record of misconduct, they would be
disqualified from holding any leadership position in the military, much
less being confirmed as the Secretary of Defense.
“Mr. Hegseth dodged and deferred questions about his conduct. He
instead focused on complaining and calling our military weak and too
“politically correct.” I am concerned that confirming Mr. Hegseth would
send a message to our troops that they will be evaluated on political
standards rather than merits, and that he will inject politics into a
nonpartisan organization.
“Further, Mr. Hegseth failed to convince us that he is capable of
running any organization remotely as complex as the Department of
Defense. He financially mismanaged two veterans' organizations and
created a workplace culture of misconduct, including several incidents
of public intoxication. This is unacceptable behavior for a Secretary of
Defense nominee.
“Further, he defended his recent statement that: “I’m straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles.”
“Finally, I am disappointed by the investigative process for Mr.
Hegseth. The point of a thorough FBI background check is to confirm that
there is no derogatory information that would compromise a nominee’s
ability to do their job.
“The FBI process designed by the Trump Transition Team for Mr.
Hegseth has been woefully inadequate. Investigators neglected to contact
critical witnesses and whistleblowers, and the final report has not
been shared with other members of the committee.
“I was also disappointed that the committee could not have a second
round of questioning with Mr. Hegseth. There are important questions
that remain unanswered, and I will continue to seek them.
“Today’s hearing has adjourned, but I believe the jury is still out. I
encourage my Republican colleagues to carefully examine the facts.”
Here's Lawrence O'Donnell reporting on the hearing.
Following the hearing, Senator Duckworth's office issued the following:
Today, combat Veteran and U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL)—a
member of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee who served 23 years
in the Reserve Forces—slammed U.S. Secretary of Defense expected nominee
Pete Hegseth on his utter lack of experience and qualifications to lead
the Department of Defense at his confirmation hearing. Pointing to a
framed copy of the Soldier’s Creed—a copy that hangs over her desk in
the Senate and hung above her bed during her recovery at Walter Reed
Medical Center after the helicopter she co-piloted was shot
down—Duckworth urged Mr. Hegseth to follow this Creed as our
servicemembers do every day, placing the mission above personal
ambition. Duckworth’s full remarks can be found on the Senator’s YouTube.
“Every day, our servicemembers follow the Soldier’s Creed as
we ask them to leave their families, walk into enemy fire and be ready
for the mission until their very last breath,” said Duckworth. “How
can we ask these warriors to train to the absolute highest standard, if
we confirm a guy who is asking us to lower the standard to make him
Secretary of Defense? The very idea that Pete Hegseth is the person to
lead our heroes is an insult to the troops who sacrifice so much for the
rest of us.”
At the hearing, Duckworth demonstrated some of the areas where Mr.
Hegseth lacks the experience or knowledge that a serious Defense
Secretary nominee should have, grilling him on basic questions that he
failed to answer. She asked him if he ever led an audit. He would not
confirm. She asked him to describe at least one of the main
international security agreements a Secretary of Defense is responsible
for leading. He could not name any. She asked him to name at least one
nation that is a part of ASEAN, an organization with several member
states who have mutual defense treaties, alliances or enhanced defense
cooperation agreements with the U.S. None of the three countries he
named were correct.
The full text of the Soldier’s Creed reads as follows:
I am an American Soldier.
I am a warrior and a member of a team.
I serve the people of the United States, and live the Army Values.
I will always place the mission first.
I will never accept defeat.
I will never quit.
I will never leave a fallen comrade.
I am disciplined, physically and mentally tough, trained and proficient in my warrior tasks and drills.
I always maintain my arms, my equipment and myself.
I am an expert and I am a professional.
I stand ready to deploy, engage, and destroy, the enemies of the United States of America in close combat.
I am a guardian of freedom and the American way of life.
I am an American Soldier.
Since Donald Trump tapped Pete Hegseth to serve as Secretary of
Defense, Duckworth has remained one of Hegseth’s sharpest critics. This
week, Duckworth and U.S. Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ)—a fellow combat
Veteran and member of SASC—penned an op-ed
underscoring that Pete Hegseth lacks the merits to be our next Defense
Secretary. Last month, Duckworth joined her fellow SASC members in sending a letter
to Susan Wiles, President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming Chief of Staff,
about whether Pete Hegseth’s attitudes toward women and allegations of
sexual assault and harassment disqualify him to be the next Secretary of
Defense.
Duckworth is a proven leader and fierce advocate for our servicemembers, Veterans and their families. In the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025National Defense Authorization Act(NDAA) that was signed into law, Duckworth secured
several important provisions that support our servicemembers and their
families, enhance strategic partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region,
improve logistics to bolster readiness and energy resiliency as well as
continue to restore American competitiveness.
Sorry that there were no overnight posts. I got pulled into something and didn't realize that I hadn't done them. There's a problem community wide with some sites. This one's fine and Trina's is as well but there's a Blogger/Blogspot issue for the other sites. I'm not sure I can fix it. I tried last night with Mike's and had no luck. But I spent about two hours on that and when I got done, I went to sleep and didn't realize that I hadn't done six or more posts to go up overnight.
