• Many Republicans Would Like to Move On from Trump
• Trump Legal Blotter
• Something Else for Trump to Worry About
• Today's 2022 Candidacy News
• Vaxxpots Are Working
• COVID Diaries: The Numbers Are Dropping, in Spite of All the Things We Are Doing Wrong
Sometimes, the drama in the ongoing soap opera that is the U.S. Senate picks up steam. So it was on Thursday, which is not terribly surprising, as the senators are rushing to tie up (some) loose ends so they can leave town for a nice vacation.
How about we start with...infrastructure? The Republicans delivered their latest counter-offer yesterday. It's $928 billion, including $506 billion for roads, $98 billion for public transit, $72 billion for water infrastructure, $65 billion for broadband infrastructure, and $56 billion for airports. White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki was nominally complimentary about the new proposal, remarking: "At first review, we note several constructive additions to the group's previous proposals, including on roads, bridges and rail."
However, this is really a case of damning the GOP Senate conference with faint praise, as Psaki promptly followed that with a long list of criticisms: "At the same time, we remain concerned that their plan still provides no substantial new funds for critical job-creating needs, such as fixing our veterans' hospitals, building modern rail systems, repairing our transit systems, removing dangerous lead pipes, and powering America's leadership in a job-creating clean energy economy, among other things." Behind the scenes, Joe Biden was unimpressed, as he can do math, and so can figure out that the Republican proposal only contains $257 billion in new funding.
In the end, the Republicans are hung up on three, somewhat related issues. The first is that they don't want to get out the checkbook, at least not while a Democrat is in the White House. The second is that they refuse to revisit the 2017 tax cut in any way, shape, or form. And the third is that they will not accept Biden's definition of infrastructure as something that goes beyond physical things like airports, roads, and Internet cables. As long as these things remain the case, then the GOP is never going to present a serious counter-offer. And if they don't do so soon, then Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) will move on, and see what he can accomplish with a combination of reconciliation and twisting Sen. Joe Manchin's (D-WV) arm (more on the Senator below).
Schumer knows (and presumably Manchin does, too) that the voting public is on the Democrats' side here. Slate's William Saletan has a nice overview of the latest infrastructure polling. The key takeaways are that: (1) Americans support Biden's plan in general, 51% to 36%; (2) those voters who support the plan are fine and dandy with increasing corporate taxes, and (3) relatively few voters—about 1%—actually care if the bill is bipartisan or not. There is also broad support (in the 60s, in most cases) for the things that Biden considers infrastructure but the Republicans do not. We see no reason to think that Republicans are going to move off their position, and in particular, they are clearly trying to keep their proposals from crossing the $1 trillion threshold. However, we do think that Manchin will eventually climb on board with some version of the Biden proposal. If this ends up passing 51-50, with zero Republican support, then that may come back to haunt the GOP in November of next year.
Moving on, let's take a look at...China. There is broad agreement, on both sides of the aisle, that something needs to be done to counter that nation's growing power and influence. A bill that would allot about $250 billion to that problem was wending its way through the Senate, then ran into GOP opposition. Yesterday, with time running short (remember: vacation!), Schumer and Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID) hammered out a deal on trade, and that allowed the bill to advance to the next stage of the process.
It seemed that the bill might even become law by the end of the night, but then Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) threw a temper tantrum because he didn't get any of his amendments into the bill. In particular, he apparently had his heart set on allotting additional funding for Donald Trump's border wall, an issue clearly relevant to U.S.-China relations. The Senator blocked the bill for several hours, and then persuaded some of his GOP colleagues to join him, with the result that about 10 Republican senators took turns Thursday night delivering one-hour rants against the bill. Nobody quite knows when, or if, the process of passing this bill will get back on track. Meanwhile, is Johnson posturing in advance of another Senate run (despite saying he would be two-terms-and-done)? Is he trying to position himself to run for president in the Trump lane? Is he just a True Believer™ who likes to make a scene? Your guess is as good as ours.
And finally, there is the 1/6 commission bill. In theory, that was going to come up for a vote before the Senate recess, but Johnson's decision to be a real...Johnson has thrown those plans into doubt. Quite a few folks are putting the full-court press on to try to make the bill happen. That list includes the mother of fallen Capitol police officer Brian Sicknick and four former DHS secretaries: Michael Chertoff, Tom Ridge, Janet Napolitano and Jeh Johnson. That's everyone who held the job on a permanent basis under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. And, of course, nobody who held the job on a permanent basis under Donald Trump.
Actually, what may be the three most interesting pieces of news on this front on Thursday all involve Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). First, McConnell is reportedly frantically whipping votes, asking senators to vote with him as a "personal favor." That would not be necessary if he was sure he had the votes to kill the bill, and so suggests that, just maybe, it might overcome a filibuster. It also suggests that, just maybe, his grip on his conference is loosening a bit.
That leads us to the second interesting piece of 1/6 commission news, courtesy of Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK). She already made clear, earlier this week, that she would vote in favor of a 1/6 commission. But on Thursday, she was grousing about her Republican colleagues, including McConnell. She accused the Minority Leader of putting the kibosh on the commission for purely political purposes, and decreed: "To be making a decision for the short-term political gain at the expense of understanding and acknowledging what was in front of us on Jan. 6, I think we need to look at that critically. Is that really what this is about, one election cycle after another?" Wow. Everyone knows that this is exactly what McConnell does, but for a member of his conference to declare it openly, and with obvious irritation? We're not going to predict his imminent demise quite yet, but can you imagine a Republican senator openly saying such things about him a year ago? Or even 3 months ago?
And finally, the third interesting piece of news on this front is also from a senator who generally plays their cards close to the vest. In this case, it's the aforementioned Manchin, who is also cross with McConnell. On Thursday, the West Virginia senator issued a statement that read, in part: "There is no excuse for any Republican to vote against the commission since Democrats have agreed to everything they asked for. Mitch McConnell has made this his political position, thinking it will help his 2022 elections. They do not believe the truth will set you free, so they continue to live in fear." If Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) had said that, you wouldn't blink twice. But Manchin? Wow again. Maybe he's moved on to Act II of "I Didn't Want to Do It, but They Made Me," and is going to start prepping West Virginians for future, potentially controversial votes. As with Murkowski, we don't want to read too much into this quite yet, but it's certainly...interesting. (Z)
As we noted yesterday, Donald Trump still owns the Republican Party, but that's about all he owns. Although nearly two-thirds of Republican voters want to see him run again, only 30% of Americans in general want that, while 66% do not. His approval rating right now is even worse than it was during most of his presidency, with 37% having a favorable view and 57% having an unfavorable one. That leaves 3% who have no opinion, and another 3% who feel they don't know enough about Trump to weigh in. Exactly how one could make it through the last 5 years with no opinion, or not knowing enough to have an opinion, we do not know. Are pollsters suddenly calling a disproportionate number of cloistered monks or something?
Anyhow, with the overwhelming majority of Americans preferring to move on from Trump, putting together a winning electoral coalition is going to be a very tall order, even with voter suppression laws and the Electoral College. And that's before we consider that Trump may be indicted, possibly convicted, and maybe even in prison by 2024. Many GOP insiders are not necessarily ready to renounce Trumpism, but they think there are less damaged candidates who can carry on the banner, like Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) or Gov. Kristi Noem (R-SD) or one of half a dozen senators, including Ted Cruz (R-TX), Tim Scott (R-SC), and Josh Hawley (R-MO). Some apparently even prefer Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), which either says something about how badly damaged Trump is, or about how little some Republican insiders pay attention to the news. Anyhow, the upshot is that we're nearing the point, if we haven't arrived there already, where the majority of GOP insiders would like to see Trump step aside.
Needless to say, not many current Republican officeholders are going to say this out loud, at least not yet. However, former officeholders are rather less constrained. Last night, former Speaker of the House and VP candidate Paul Ryan emerged from wherever he's been holed up to deliver a speech at the Ronald Reagan library. And in it, Ryan took a few potshots at Joe Biden, and then a considerably larger number of potshots at Trump. He lamented the "dishonorable and disgraceful end" to Trump's presidency, criticized Trump for focusing too much on "the latest grievance or perceived slight," and warned that if the conservative movement fails, "It will be because we gave too much allegiance to one passing political figure, and weren't loyal enough to our principles."
Ultimately, not too many people care what Ryan has to say. Still, the more prominent Republican voices that speak out against Trump, the closer things come to reaching a tipping point. (Z)
We like Trump-free days much more than Trump-heavy days. Beyond our feelings about the man himself, the fact is that there just isn't that much interesting stuff left to say about him. Some days, however, there is a lot of Trump-related news, and our hands are tied.
In addition to the political maneuvering we discuss above, there was a bit of movement on the Trump legal front, as there will be on many days in the next year or two or three. To start, at least one witness in Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance's case has been told to prepare to testify before the newly empaneled grand jury. Tea-leaves-readers suggest this is a sign that the investigation is pretty far advanced.
Meanwhile, there have been a rash of articles this week suggesting that the Trumps could be popped for racketeering. We seem to recall someone suggesting that possibility last week, though we're still trying to put our finger on the exact source. Not everyone agrees that this is a good strategy, either because they think it will be hard to sell to a jury, or because they worry the statute of limitations has run (there would have to be two distinct crimes in the last 5 years). Still, the majority of former prosecutors who have been interviewed on the subject think racketeering is more likely than not.
And finally, although Team Trump is nervous about his legal exposure, they reportedly think it could be electoral gold. "They are using their power to destroy their number one political enemy. They are trying to crush him," said Trump insider Matt Schlapp, for example. "And will there be reverberations from that that will benefit Trump from that, absolutely."
To us, this sounds like wishful thinking, or bad analysis, or both. There is no doubt that if Trump runs for the presidency again (and even if he doesn't), he will whine and moan about how he's a victim, and this is all the work of the Deep State, and he never, ever did anything wrong. However, what voters out there will go from "voting Biden/not voting at all/voting third party" to "voting Trump" solely because the former president is accused, or indicted, or convicted (and does a bunch of complaining about it)?
In other words, while this might fire up the base, we can't see how it will reach much of anyone else. And it might not even fire up the base. Recall that most of Trump's politics of grievance involved things that ostensibly affect the lives of his voters, like "immigrants taking our jobs" or "Muslim terrorists." Will they really be highly motivated if the grievance in question affects only him? And is there some possibility that even some of the base will get tired of years upon years of whining? In short, this seems less like electoral gold and more like electoral pyrite to us. (Z)
Sometimes, you plant a seed, and it grows into a mighty tree. And most of the time, you plant a seed, and it doesn't grow into a mighty tree. This story is just a seed right now and, more likely than not, nothing will come of it. But just in case it becomes a sequoia, we're going to pass it along.
It was actually late-night talker Stephen Colbert who first pointed it out, and he did so in service of a joke. So that right there means you should take this with a few grains of salt. Still, as most folks have heard by now, Amazon just purchased MGM, including the studio's vast back catalog. That means that Jeff Bezos, often the target of Trumpian scorn and anger, effectively owns "The Apprentice," including archived, unaired footage. The former president, of course, reportedly said some very un-PC things that did not make it to air. So, Bezos may decide to take revenge against his nemesis. Colbert's joke, incidentally, was that Bezos is in a position to "release the most racist thing in the MGM catalog...other than 'Gone With the Wind.'"
There are a lot of "ifs" and "maybes" in between this story and a possible airing of Trump's dirty laundry. The stories about him saying racist and otherwise offensive things would have to be true, and the footage would still have to exist. Bezos, or someone else with the ability to release the footage, would have to be interested in actually releasing it. And there may be legal issues that keep the footage from being released (unless someone chose to, say, anonymously mail a copy to The Washington Post). Again, probably nothing will come of this. But, if footage of Trump liberally using the n-word does somehow come to light, that will be incredibly difficult for the people who run the Republican Party to overlook. (Z)
As it is the thick of "put up or shut up" time, declarations or near-declarations of 2022 candidacy are coming fast and furious. Here are the latest ones of interest:
- President: As rumored, Sen. John F. Kennedy (D-MA) has officially entered the presidential race.
His youth (he's 41) and his Catholicism could be problems for him, but he's oozing with charisma, and he can tap his old
man for money as needed. He's presumably going to be part of a crowded Democratic field, with Senate Majority Leader
Lyndon B. Johnson (D-TX); Sens. Stuart Symington (D-MO), Hubert Humphrey (DFL-MN), Wayne Morse (D-OR), and George
Smathers (D-FL) and two-time Democratic nominee Adlai Stevenson also expected to mount bids. Still, Kennedy will...wait
a minute. We just got a note that this news might be out of date.
Ok, truth be told, we search Google for "candidacy announcements" just to make sure we don't miss any. And when you do that, JFK's announcement of his presidential campaign is the first hit. Apparently, people are more interested in Kennedy than candidates who are, you know, alive. It's also worth noting that Kennedy entered the race on Jan. 2, 1960. Today, a candidate would never wait until that late.
- U.S. Senate, Iowa: Abby Finkenauer (D) won election in R+4 IA-01 in 2018, and then lost
her reelection bid in 2020. She's now going to
take her chances
with the whole state of Iowa, which is R+6, running for the seat currently occupied by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R). She is
betting on two things: (1) that Grassley decides to retire, and (2) that she'll do better on a Trump-free ballot, as in
2018, than she did with a Trump-included ballot in 2020. If she does somehow win, continued Democratic control of the
Senate is all-but-assured.
- U.S. House, Florida: When politicians try for a promotion, it often creates a ripple
effect. So it is with Rep. Val Demings' (D-FL) announcement that she would challenge Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL). This not
only caused Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-FL) to abandon her own plans to challenge Rubio, it also led to much jockeying for
the seat representing FL-10 that Demings will be vacating. Former prosecutor Aramis Ayala (D) had already signaled an
intent to run, and on Thursday she was
by state Sen. Randolph Bracy (D). Bracy's state senate district, which he has represented for five years, substantially
overlaps with FL-10 (about 80% overlap). So, he has to be considered the favorite until there is evidence to the
- Governor, Rhode Island: With former governor Gina Raimondo (D) having decamped to Washington to
serve as Secretary of Commerce, her lieutenant governor, Daniel McKee (D), is now running the show in The Ocean State. He will
run for election in his own right next year but he will now
have to compete
with Secretary of State Nellie Gorbea (D) for the Democratic nomination. She's had a successful run as SoS, and McKee is
not wildly popular, so it should be a barnburner. Whoever emerges from that will be the favorite to win the general
election. If Gorbea is elected, she will become the third Latina to serve as a state governor, after Susana Martinez (R)
and Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D), both of New Mexico.
- Governor, Nevada: Gov. Steve Sisolak (D-NV) is above water, approval-wise, but not by much
(48%-43%). He's also the only Democrat that purplish Nevada has sent to the governor's mansion this century. In other
words, this is a top target for Republicans if they can find a strong candidate. And, as of Thursday, they think they
as former representative and senator Dean Heller entered the race. The good news for the GOP is that Heller has
big-time name recognition and he's won statewide in Nevada before. The bad news is that he lost his last statewide
election (to Sen. Jacky Rosen, D) and he's going to face a large primary field. Also, Heller has gone back and forth
on Donald Trump, sometimes supporting him, sometimes opposing him. As we've noted previously, we don't think
a Republican can win elections these days from the semi-Trump lane.
- Attorney General, Texas: We don't normally follow state-level races beyond governor, but
this one is very interesting, as Land Commissioner George P. Bush (R)
that he will challenge Texas AG Ken Paxton (R). There are three different storylines here: (1) Which Trumpy candidate
will get The Donald's endorsement?, (2) Will Paxton be brought down by ongoing investigations into securities fraud and
corruption, which have already produced one indictment?, and (3) Whither the Bush dynasty? The last question is of the
most interest to us; the Bushes have largely avoided a direct confrontation with Trump so as to protect the career of
George P., who is the only member currently in the family business. If George P. does not get Trump's endorsement, or if
he loses, then all bets might just be off.
- Attorney General, Arkansas: Two charismatic, young Democratic attorneys have just announced bids for the Attorney Generalship of Arkansas: Jesse Gibson and Jason Davis. They're probably not going to win, since they have limited name recognition, no political experience, and Arkansas is a red state. We mention it, however, because there was once an unknown charismatic young Democratic attorney who shocked everyone by winning the Arkansas attorney generalship, followed by the Arkansas governor's mansion, followed by another rather famous executive mansion. Remember that bit about a seed sometimes growing into a sequoia.
Undoubtedly, there will be a bunch more announcements next week. (Z)
This week, Ohio announced its first $1 million vaccination winner. Her name, should it be of interest, is Abbigail Bugenske. The Buckeye State also awarded its first college scholarship, to a fellow named Joseph Costello.
The Ohio initiative has been a wild success, presumably beyond Gov. Mike DeWine's (R-OH) fondest hopes. In the week before Vaxx-a-Million was announced, the number of vaccinations in Ohio dropped 25% as compared to the previous week, part of a monthlong downward trend. In the week after the program was instituted, the number of vaccinations jumped 28%. Ohio was one of the very few states to show an increase that week.
Given how well things have worked out for the Ohioans, other states have instituted their own copycat programs:
$40,000 to a vaccinated resident every day for 40 days, and then $400,000 to one grand prize winner on July 4.
- New York will, for at least a week,
everyone who is vaccinated at one of the state's 10 mass-vaccination sites a ticket in the state's $20 scratch-off lottery. The top prize
available is $5 million.
$1 million a week for 5 weeks; any vaccinated Coloradan is eligible.
$116.5 million to residents who are vaccinated by June 15, when pretty much all masking, social distancing,
etc. restrictions will come to an end in the state. Ten Californians will win $1.5 million, 30 will win $50,000, and 2 million will get
$50 gift cards.
- Minnesota will reward 100,000 residents who get vaccinated in June with a free summer pass valid at all state parks.
Hm. One of these things is not like the others.
In our previous item on Ohio's vaccine lottery program, we supposed that there's a lot of overlap between the population that does not grasp that the risks of COVID-19 are far, far greater than the risks of getting vaccinated, and the population that does not grasp how unlikely it is to win a lottery. However, we wonder if there aren't a couple of other dynamics going on here. First, there are certainly people who want the vaccine but who have been procrastinating for various reasons. The lottery programs are presumably lighting a fire under some of those folks. "I might as well get the shot now, when I might also win $[X], as opposed to waiting until I'm not going to win anything." Further, for far too many people, getting the vaccine is a concession to the libs, the man, the Democrats, the Deep State, etc. Perhaps this gives some of those people something to tell their friends, or themselves, when they get vaccinated: "I don't like the libs, but I dislike missing out on a chance at a million bucks even more." Something like that. (Z)
Vaccine supply has now exceeded demand. Demand will bump up again now that vaccination of 12-16-year-olds is available, but the reality is that about one-fourth of the population will refuse the vaccine. The oversupply is not due to the fact that everyone has been vaccinated, but instead because nearly everyone who is willing to get the shot has been vaccinated. Vaccine "hesitancy" will drive how long COVID remains a problem.
The polarization of COVID-19 prevention measures continues to get worse. People are fighting back on airplanes, screaming at teachers, and openly declaring that all restrictions are part of a liberal plot to prepare us for total subjugation by the government. This nonsense is egged on by the right-wing media. Tucker Carlson of Fox News has encouraged people to aggressively confront people who continue to wear masks outdoors:
Worldwide, we are still in trouble. India has totally lost control of the pandemic. The numbers on Worldometer only hint at the human tragedy. Until a few weeks ago, for the previous two months, India experienced exponential growth in the numbers of new cases and deaths. There are plenty of stories about how the health care system there has collapsed. This is a dire case study of how fast an infectious virus can run unchecked though a population. We can only hope that the worst has passed.
Vaccines are not perfect, though evidence suggests that the vaccines work pretty well. At Rockefeller University, 417 employees were vaccinated and closely followed, and only 2 subsequently showed up with a positive COVID test. At a local hospital in Pennsylvania, meanwhile, there are 50 COVID patients being treated. All but one of them had not been vaccinated.
These anecdotes support the contention that the vaccine may not prevent infection entirely but does seem to reduce the impact of the disease. It also shows that perhaps the level of protection provided by the vaccines might be less in immunocompromised individuals.
There is some speculation that COVID-19 is here to stay. I am a little more optimistic. SARS-CoV-2 is a very infectious virus. If you are not vaccinated and congregate in groups, you are going to get it. I suspect that almost everyone (or at least enough to get to herd immunity) will either get vaccinated or they will get COVID in the next few months. I am hoping that the numbers drop significantly by the end of the summer.
So, what do we do now? First, recognize that the CDC guidelines are what they think they can talk us into, and not necessarily what is safe. It will be safe to go back to normal when the numbers go down. If we pack classrooms full of students, or churches full of families, we are going to see more outbreaks even if they are staying within the CDC guidelines. So, manage your own risk and behave accordingly.
The other thing we can do is encourage others to get vaccinated. However, the trend encouraged by some of "let's shame them into it" will probably be as effective as, say, drinking disinfectant to cure COVID. We need to encourage with respect rather than insult and blame. If the person still refuses to be vaccinated, that is their decision and we need to respect it. We do not need everybody to get vaccinated to stop this disease.
We finally have enough people vaccinated or previously infected that the spread of COVID is decreasing. I am not asserting we have reached the ever-changing threshold for "herd immunity." But numbers going down is certainly better than them going up. There are still pockets of rising infections but, in general, things are looking better than they have in a long time. We have near-universal rebellion against all restrictions from 50% of the population and half of Republicans are refusing the vaccine outright. In spite of all this, the numbers (cases, deaths and hospitalizations) are all going down. The Biden administration is striving valiantly to vaccinate as many people as possible (they're aiming for 70% by July). Reaching that goal will be difficult if the White House can't win over some hearts and minds, though.
As poorly as the U.S. has done in combating COVID, overall, I expect the numbers to continue to drop. However, if a new, more infectious and a more deadly variant comes out of India or someplace else, we will jump back on the exponential growth train with a population unwilling to fight anymore. Let us hope that doesn't happen. (PD)
Dr. Paul Dorsey, Ph.D., works in medical software, providing software to support medical practices and hospitals nationwide.
If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.
- firstname.lastname@example.org For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
- email@example.com For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
- firstname.lastname@example.org To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
- email@example.com For general suggestions, ideas, etc.
To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.
Email a link to a friend or share:
---The Votemaster and Zenger
May27 Trump Still Owns the Republican Party
May27 Is Wokeness Going to Destroy the Democratic Party?
May27 Ticket Splitting Is on Life Support
May27 Catherine Cortez Masto Is in for a Tough Race
May27 Missouri Congressman Met with Trump about Senate Race
May27 Yang Is Losing His Grip
May27 Former Virginia Senator John Warner Is Dead
May26 Trump Grand Jury Is Convened
May26 1/6 Commission Bill Speeds Up
May26 Infrastructure Bill Slows Down
May26 Newsom Looks Very Safe
May26 Don't Know Much about History, Part II: Marjorie Taylor Greene
May26 Santorum Just the Latest in the CNN Trump Talking Head Parade
May25 Whither the 1/6 Commission?
May25 Liz Cheney Is Still a Staunchly Partisan Republican
May25 DeSantis and Co. Lash Out at Social Media Platforms
May25 The Performance of "Infrastructure" Will Soon Close
May25 Today's 2022 Candidacy News
May25 Don't Know Much about History, Part I: Rick Santorum
May24 Biden Makes Concessions to Republicans
May24 Democrats See Republicans' Refusal to Investigate the Insurrection as Electoral Gold
May24 How Trump's Big Lie Continues to Affect Politics
May24 Jennifer Weisselberg: Allen Will Flip
May24 Why Is Arizona Really Recounting the Ballots?
May24 Georgia Also Wants to Get into the Act
May24 Republicans Try to Limit Ballot Initiatives
May24 One of Cheney's Challengers Has Admitted to Statutory Rape
May23 Sunday Mailbag
May22 Saturday Q&A
May21 Problem Solved--For Now
May21 Biden Wants to Know How Much Climate Change Costs
May21 Trump in Trouble
May21 And About that Reelection Bid...
May21 Gillibrand Will Be Back
May21 Newsom Collects $3 Million Check for Recall Effort
May20 McConnell Now Opposes the Jan. 6 Commission Bill
May20 Trump Lashes Out at Letitia James
May20 Many Democrats Want to Kill Negotiations with GOP on the Infrastructure Bill
May20 Catching Tax Cheats Won't Help Fund Infrastructure Bill
May20 Texas Bans Nearly All Abortions
May20 Florida Opens the Door to Casinos at Trump's Properties
May20 Is the Republican Party Going to Splinter?
May20 Trump Has Kept His Key Staffers--on the Government's Dime
May20 Ambitious Democrats May Cost Their Party the House
May20 Democrats Will Soon Meet in Person
May19 Maybe Not a Civil War, but Certainly a Nasty Squabble
May19 It's Criminal
May19 Giuliani Is In...
May19 ...And So Is Demings...