Mediaboss Marketing

Updated at 7:10 p.m.: Revised to include statement from Houston Rep. Lizzie Fletcher backing impeachment.

WASHINGTON Dallas Rep. Colin Allred on Friday announced that he will vote to impeach President Donald Trump, saying it is clear the president engaged in an abuse of his authority, putting himself above the law, and his personal interests above the nations.

These uncontroverted facts are an unacceptable violation of his oath of office and constitute an impeachable abuse of power, he said in a news release. This is a somber moment for our nation, and I have not reached this decision lightly.

Allred, a freshman lawmaker, had been one of three Texas Democrats to not yet make clear their position on impeachment.

His announcement came shortly after the House Judiciary Committee on Friday voted along party lines to approve two articles of impeachment against Trump over his Ukraine dealings. One article covers abuse of power, while the other covers obstruction of Congress.

Later Friday another Texas Democrat, Rep. Lizzie Fletcher of Houston, also announced that she will vote to impeach Trump.

As a member of Congress, I also swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, she said in a news release. And that is why, when the articles of impeachment are presented in the House, I will vote yes on both.

That leaves Rep. Henry Cuellar of Laredo as the only one of the 13 Texas Democrats in Congress who has not said how hell vote next week, when the Democrat-run House is expected to take up and pass the impeachment articles.

Trump has denied any wrongdoing, calling the Democrats impeachment push a scam and a witch hunt. Its widely expected that he will be acquitted in the GOP-run Senate, which is poised to take up the matter early next year.

While the outcome in the House is considered a foregone conclusion, theres been some question about how so-called frontline Democrats would vote.

Allred last year helped Democrats win back the House for the first time in years by upsetting a longtime GOP congressman. That standing has made him a top 2020 target for Republicans, who have kept close tabs on where the Democrat stands on impeachment.

The National Republican Congressional Committee, the House GOPs campaign arm, was quick to criticize Allreds decision.

Colin Allred ran on a promise to get results for Texans, but all hes focused on in Washington is his deranged quest to remove President Trump from office, said Bob Salera, an NRCC spokesman. Allred is a partisan hack and will be voted out next November.

But Allred, perhaps anticipating that jab, said he will not allow this process to distract me from the important work of delivering real results for North Texas families. The Democrat, just on Thursday, attended a White House event to promote the need for expanded paid parental leave.

This is not about partisan politics, Allred said, referring to impeachment. It is about protecting our democracy.

Many other Texas Democrats have long been vocal advocates for impeaching Trump, particularly since the controversy emerged over Ukraine. Even before that, Houston Rep. Al Green was among the first Democrats in the House to advocate for impeachment.

But Allred had been in the noncommittal camp with Fletcher, another freshman who last year toppled a GOP incumbent, and Cuellar, a centrist with a GOP-friendly voting record.

Fletcher had kept open her options earlier this week. She issued a statement then that said Trump engaged in certain conduct. But she only went so far to say that she would review and consider the proposed articles of impeachment when they are presented to Congress.

That position drew the attention of the Trump campaign, which accused Fletcher of backing down from her position in September that the House should act swiftly to investigate and should be prepared to use the remedy exclusively in its power: impeachment.

What has happened between then and now? Trump Victory spokeswoman Samantha Cotten said. Could it be the dwindling support for impeachment among Americans?

But Fletcher on Friday was blunt, saying that Trump used the power of the Office of the President to solicit a personal, political benefit."

Cuellar, meanwhile, said earlier this week that he was going to wait til everything is brought in and then once everythings brought in, Ill make a decision based on the evidence. He said to expect a definitive answer next week.

His deliberations have earned him attacks from his primary opponent Jessica Cisneros, a progressive activist who accused Cuellar of being Trumps favorite Democrat.

Texas Republicans, in turn, have been some of Trumps most passionate defenders, and the states GOP delegation is expected to vote in unison against the impeachment articles. Some political handicappers are predicting that not a single House Republican will buck Trump.

Go here to read the rest:
Texas Reps. Allred and Fletcher, Democrats facing tough 2020 race, will vote to impeach Trump - The Dallas Morning News

WASHINGTON The White House and House Democrats reached an agreement to strengthen labor, environmental, pharmaceutical and enforcement provisions in President Trumps North American trade pact, a significant development that made it all but certain that the signature trade deal would become law.

The agreement on a revised United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement was announced on Tuesday by Speaker Nancy Pelosi after months of negotiations, handing Mr. Trump one of his biggest legislative victories less than an hour after she unveiled articles of impeachment.

Ms. Pelosi went from a news conference on impeachment to another on the trade deal, where she and top Democrats, including Representative Richard E. Neal of Massachusetts, pointed to concessions they had secured in closed-door negotiations with the administration.

Were declaring victory for the American worker, Ms. Pelosi said. It is infinitely better than what was initially proposed by the administration.

The timing of the handshake agreement offers Mr. Trump a crucial victory to promote on the campaign trail during his re-election bid and House Democrats tangible proof that they are able to legislate while preparing to vote on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress against the president.

Mr. Trump, who spent weeks blaming Ms. Pelosi for standing in the way of a trade deal that he said would help workers, played up the progress and suggested the House speaker did so to smother the impeachment crap.

Weve been waiting a long time for Nancy Pelosi to announce U.S.M.C.A., he said at a rally on Tuesday night in Hershey, Pa. And she did it on the same day that they announced that they are going to impeach the 45th president of the United States, and your favorite president.

In a statement, Mr. Trumps top trade adviser, Robert E. Lighthizer, called the announcement a victory for Mr. Trump.

After working with Republicans, Democrats, and many other stakeholders for the past two years, we have created a deal that will benefit American workers, farmers and ranchers for years to come, he said.

Ms. Pelosi repeatedly rebuffed Republican suggestions that Democrats had timed the announcement to try to minimize any negative fallout from the impeachment proceedings.

Not any one of us is important enough to hold up a trade agreement that is important for American workers, she said.

The administration agreed with Canada and Mexico on revisions to the North American Free Trade Agreement one year ago, but the deal requires the approval of Congress, including the Democratic-controlled House. Ms. Pelosi and her colleagues have used that vote as leverage to secure long-sought policy changes to a long-maligned trade deal.

Make no mistake, Representative Earl Blumenauer, Democrat of Oregon, said Tuesday. This is a Democrats agreement that we fought for, and its going to be the template going forward for writing new trade agreements.

Ms. Pelosi was more candid in a private meeting with her caucus on Tuesday morning. These have been the fights, she said, referring to the changes they secured. And we stayed on this and we ate their lunch.

Mr. Neal, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, said he remained hopeful that the House could vote on the agreement before the end of the year. Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, said that the Senate would not bring the deal for a vote before Dec. 20, when lawmakers are scheduled to leave for a holiday break.

Thatll have to come up, in all likelihood, after a trial is finished in the Senate, he said, referring to the impeachment proceedings.

Among the biggest victories was an agreement to remove intellectual property protections for the pharmaceutical industry, which Democrats warned could undermine efforts to make health care more affordable. Democrats also persuaded the White House to strengthen the deals enforcement provisions, and obtained commitments to ensure Mexico is adhering to labor reforms.

Those changes were critical to winning the support of labor unions, including the influential AFL-CIO, which endorsed the revised pact just moments before Ms. Pelosis announcement.

In fact, the deal addressed so many of the Democrats concerns that some Republicans appeared skeptical of the final agreement and suggested that Mr. Lighthizer had given away too much.

Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, voiced concern that Mr. Lighthizer had potentially spent more time talking with House Democrats than Republicans on the final product. And Senator Patrick J. Toomey, Republican of Pennsylvania and one of the most ardent critics of the deal, railed against both the original deal and the new changes, including the removal of the pharmaceutical provision.

Its clearly moved way to the left, Mr. Toomey told reporters. It seemed to be just a one-way direction in the direction of Democrats.

The changes must now be woven into implementing legislation that the House and Senate will both vote on. The pact will also need to secure the presidents signature and the final approval of the Mexican and Canadian legislatures.

In Mexico City, President Andrs Manuel Lpez Obrador attended a signing agreement at the National Palace. The event was attended by Mr. Lighthizer and Jared Kushner, the presidents senior adviser and son-in-law, as well as Chrystia Freeland, who negotiated the pact on behalf of Canada.

Mr. Lighthizer called the agreement the first truly bipartisan agreement, saying it was nothing short of a miracle that we have all come together.

Mr. Lighthizer on Tuesday briefed groups of House and Senate Republicans by phone on the changes. While some expressed concern, most Republicans appeared to maintain their support for the new trade pact, even with the new changes negotiated by Democrats.

Senator Rob Portman, Republican of Ohio, declared relief in an interview, and noted that such a compromise in a divided government is a rare feat around here, and we should celebrate it.

And as Mr. Neal left the news conference, Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the Republican whip, shook his hand. A spokeswoman said Mr. Scalise had promised Mr. Lighthizer strong Republican support for the deal.

Theres a Republican leader saying it was good, Mr. Neal said as he entered an elevator. That wasnt staged.

The agreement came as a huge relief to industries that have grown up around NAFTA and rely on tariff-free trade across Canada, Mexico and the United States. The lack of movement in Congress, combined with Mr. Trumps threats to walk away from the original NAFTA pact, had created crippling uncertainty among businesses.

This is finally good news on the trade front after a long, hard year, said Rufus H. Yerxa, the president of the National Foreign Trade Council, which represents major exporters. We believe this agreement will further strengthen the North American region, bringing about the commercial stability and certainty that our companies need to remain competitive in the global economy.

The administration and Republicans in both chambers have hammered Ms. Pelosi and her caucus to take action. Even within Ms. Pelosis majority, several moderate members and a number of the freshmen who flipped Republican-held seats in 2018 had begun pressuring leadership for a vote on the pact before the end of the year.

The deal announced Tuesday offered Ms. Pelosi and her core allies justification for the delay by establishing what she said would be a legacy agreement that set the standard for future trade deals.

In addition to updating rules for digital commerce, Mr. Trumps U.S.M.C.A. raised the threshold for the proportion of a cars value that must be made in North America in order to qualify for the pacts zero tariffs. It also rolls back a special system of arbitration for corporations long opposed by Democrats.

One of the most significant revisions will roll back protections for new pharmaceutical products, in particular an advanced class of drugs called biologics, which were initially given 10 years of protection from cheaper alternatives. It also removed language that would ensure patent protections when drug companies find new uses for their existing products, a process known as evergreening.

Those changes are a big departure from past trade agreements, which sought to lock in stronger protections for intellectual property, long seen as a competitive advantage for the American economy.

Just three years ago, Republicans blocked the progress of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a 12-country trade deal negotiated by President Barack Obama, over complaints that similar protections for drug companies were not strong enough. The pact never gained enough support for a congressional vote under Mr. Obama, and Mr. Trump pulled the United States out of the deal during his first week in office.

Mr. Blumenauer said the pharmaceutical revisions would change the landscape on trade agreements. If we go back and review the other trade agreements weve had, they are replete with pharmaceutical protections, he said. This is a very significant shift.

The drug industry was not pleased.

The announcement made today puts politics over patients, Stephen J. Ubl, the president and chief executive of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, said in a statement. The only winners today are foreign governments who want to steal American intellectual property and free ride on Americas global leadership in biopharmaceutical research and development.

The revisions also beefed up labor protections, especially in Mexico. While Mexican negotiators succeeded in rebuffing Democrats demand for American inspections of Mexican factories, they agreed to additional funding and oversight to ensure that Mexico proceeds with strengthening its labor laws and unions. The United States will also be allowed to block goods from specific Mexican factories if companies are found in violation of labor rules.

Democrats also said they had succeeded in bolstering enforcement of the trade pact by stripping out a provision added by Mr. Lighthizer which had curbed the ability of countries to bring disputes against one another.

In a loss for Ms. Pelosi, the pact will still contain certain legal protections that may shield online platforms like Facebook and Twitter from some lawsuits over content posted by their users.

Ms. Pelosi acknowledged the inclusion of those provisions was a disappointment, adding, I mean, I lost.

Catie Edmondson and David McCabe contributed reporting from Washington, and Elisabeth Malkin from Mexico City.

See the original post here:
Trump Aides and Democrats Agree on Trade Pact With Mexico and Canada - The New York Times

HOUSTON As he began his closing statement at a forum here Tuesday night, Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Chris Bell seemed to sum up well the mood around the long-uncertain primary.

I thought we were going to wake up to sunshine this morning since the cloud of Beto ORourke had been lifted off of this race," Bell said to some knowing chuckles in the crowd, which had gathered in a Houston church on a rainy evening. "That was not to be, but in all seriousness, the filing deadline has passed, the field is set, and I think its time that we get down to business."

The forum, hosted by Indivisible, fell just about 24 hours after the filing period ended for the 2020 elections and with it, the speculation that O'Rourke could make a late entry into the Senate primary after his exit from the presidential race last month. Democrats now officially have their work cut out for them as a dozen candidates some more serious than others but no clear frontrunners vie for the chance to face U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, despite universally low name ID and modest fundraising at best.

Tensions in the field have run mostly low, but that is beginning to change. At least one candidate, Latina organizer Cristina Tzintzn Ramirez, has started moving more aggressively to distinguish herself, while additional areas of potential scrutiny have begun to emerge around other candidates. Tzintzn Ramirez has increasingly found a foil in rival MJ Hegar, who is holding firm on a general election-focused campaign while resisting the progressive impulses that Tzintzn Ramirez and some others have shown.

To that end, Tzintzn Ramirez's credentials are getting a boost Friday with the endorsement of the Working Families Party, a labor-aligned third party that backed Bernie Sanders for president in 2016 and is supporting Elizabeth Warren for 2020. The group, which has an increasingly active Texas chapter, shared the endorsement first with The Texas Tribune.

"We think she's the true progressive in the race, and that's why we're getting behind her," said Jorge Contreras, the party's Texas state director. "We've worked with Workers Defense and Jolt" two organizing groups that Tzintzn Ramirez helped start "and we see that she's actually been throwing down for a long time in the state."

Tzintzn Ramirez is campaigning on "Medicare for All," a Green New Deal and a mandatory buyback program for assault weapons all proposals that Hegar has not embraced or has even overtly rejected. Hegar, an Air Force veteran, is touting herself as neither a moderate nor a progressive but an "ass-kicking" working mom with broad appeal. For months, she has talked openly about training her campaign exclusively on beating Cornyn, ignoring primary rivals and declining opportunities to criticize them.

On a conference call with reporters after filing Monday, Hegar said she had no plans to change that approach as the primary gets closer and the field remains muddled, saying, "This is who I am, and who I am is not interested in taking shots at people who share my values" and are also trying to "move the needle."

Still, Hegar's strategy ran into some controversy a couple of days later when she was asked about Tzintzn Ramirez suggesting the primary was coming down to her and Hegar and Hegar replied, "Well, it is a two-person race. It's me and John Cornyn." While Hegar added that she was not taking the primary for granted, Tzintzn Ramirez's campaign fired back in a fundraising email hours later that said it "seems like MJ forgot that Cristina was most recently shown to be leading this primary, or that theres a diverse crowd of other incredible Democratic candidates running too." (The campaign was apparently referring to a November poll that had Tzintzn Ramirez in the No. 1 spot but within the margin of error of other candidates clustered in the single digits.)

It was not the first time there was friction between the two in recent weeks. After Hegar reiterated to The Dallas Morning News in late October that she does not support mandatory buybacks for assault weapons an idea that O'Rourke championed in his White House bid Tzintzn Ramirez pushed back in a pointed tweet that said, "Our children's lives are on the line. This isn't a time for political caution." So did Bell, the former Houston congressman, who released a straight-to-camera video saying he was "incredibly disappointed" by Hegar's stance and tweeted that he is "100% with Beto on this one."

To be sure, other contenders, such as state Sen. Royce West of Dallas and Houston City Councilwoman Amanda Edwards, have stopped short of backing mandatory buybacks, only going as far as to support an assault weapons ban. And Bell and Tzintzn Ramirez are not the only candidates in favor of mandatory buybacks so is Sema Hernandez, ORourkes 2018 primary opponent, who is a vocal advocate of many of the same issues that top Tzintzn Ramirezs platform.

Hegar's supporters brush off the growing scrutiny, noting she is the fundraising leader in the primary $2.1 million raised as of last quarter and arguing she will be the strongest Democrat against Cornyn with her resources and ability to appeal to independent voters and even Republicans. They point to her military background as well as her stronger-than-expected performance in a traditionally red congressional district last year, losing by fewer than 3 percentage points to Rep. John Carter, R-Round Rock.

"I think she's the frontrunner I thought that before, and I think that now," said Jon Soltz, chairman of VoteVets, Hegar's earliest national endorser. "When you have a huge state with a lot of media markets, it's gonna come down to who voters get to know first. MJ's raised more than anybody else."

Soltz said his group considers Hegar a progressive and argued such distinctions are irrelevant if a candidate does not have the resources to compete. "If no one knows who you are," he said, "you're not a progressive."

Tzintzn Ramirez's campaign is unwilling to cede the viability mantle to Hegar. Noting she had a monthslong "head start on us," Tzintzn Ramirez campaign manager David Sanchez said the campaign is on its way to surpassing $1 million total raised by the end of this quarter. If the primary comes down to money, he added, "we're gonna be extremely competitive."

Despite the recent action centering on Hegar and Tzintzn Ramirez, polls show the primary remains wide open, with no candidate well known to Texas Democrats and large shares of primary voters unsure of whom they would vote for. A University of Texas/Texas Tribune Poll released last month found no candidate had higher than 24% name ID among Democratic voters, and 57% said they do not know who they will support or have an opinion yet.

The filing deadline was 6 p.m. Monday, and the field was anything but finalized in the days leading up to it. One of the candidates, Midland City Councilman John Love, dropped out three days before the deadline, saying he has "concluded that I lack the time and financial resources to compete as effectively as I would like." A new candidate, Houston nonprofit leader Annie Garcia, jumped in with days to spare, promising to bring the perspective of "one fed-up mama." And with a week until the deadline, O'Rourke supporters released a poll showing he would be the strongest candidate against Cornyn, reviving speculation about an 11th-hour run.

O'Rourke reiterated a few days later he would not run and never filed, but he still looms large over the race, both when it comes to policy mandatory buybacks and politics. About two hours before the filing deadline, Tzintzn Ramirez announced endorsements from 21 former staffers from O'Rourke's 2020 and 2018 campaigns including 2018 campaign manager Jody Casey seven of which are on Tzintzn Ramirez's staff.

O'Rourke said in September he would not consider endorsing in the primary, though he is not entirely receding from the fray. Hegar spoke with him Tuesday night, she revealed at a Tribune event the next morning, quickly making clear that he appears willing to help any candidate who wants it.

"I want to make sure that I'm not painting it like I have access to him or support for from him that other candidates don't," she said. "I think he's the type of servant leader that would answer the phone for anybody on the ticket and would give any of them advice."

In addition to swiping at Hegar over mandatory buybacks, Bell has questioned her commitment to the Democratic Party, suggesting in the same video that she has made a "recent entrance" into the party. It appeared to be a reference to her participation in the 2016 Republican primary, which she has explained as a protest vote against Donald Trump.

Tzintzn Ramirez, meanwhile, could tempt criticism with her acknowledgment last month that she narrowed her campaign's initial pledge against accepting all PAC money a promise that O'Rourke famously adhered to to just corporate PAC money. She said she dialed back the pledge after hearing from labor unions who wanted to have the option to give to her through their political arms.

Other candidates are largely staying out of the fray, driving messages that date to their campaign launches. West is continuing to stress his long record on Democratic issues since he first got to the Senate in 1993. "I've been there" is a common refrain of his stump speech and so are reminders of his support from large majorities of his colleagues in the Senate and Texas House.

Edwards is continuing to lean on her experience in municipal government, while Bell is also pressing his experience specifically his time in Congress that saw him file the ethics complaint that helped lead to the downfall of former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land. Last month, Bell sought to further highlight that achievement when he released an anti-corruption plan after a Cornyn donor admitted to coordinating illegal campaign contributions in 2017.

As for the incumbent, there has been no shortage of colorful attacks from the Democrats as they seek to portray him as a toady of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and President Donald Trump. Hegar has referred to Cornyn as a "spineless, pantywaist, bootlicking ass-kisser," while Hernandez gave a closing statement Tuesday night that was similarly unvarnished.

"Going forward, I invite you to join me," she said, "so we can get bitch-ass Cornyn out of office."

Disclosure: The University of Texas at Austin has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

Read the original:
Texas Democratic primary for Senate gets "down to business" without O'Rourke - The Texas Tribune

Does that seem fair?

Bret: Mine would be a little different: Kamala in 20/20 hindsight: She failed to be bold and sounded like a scold. In the meantime, I have a foreboding that Trump is going to win.

Gail: Stop! Stop! We havent even gotten to Iowa yet. Rudy Giuliani hasnt shown us the documentary hes been shooting on his version of the Ukraine scandal. (Hope it includes at least a couple of Martians.) Before the election, we may very well get to see the Trump taxes. Don Jr. and Eric may announce theyve sold the rights to a Trump hotel to a wealthy war criminal. Cheer up. Its the holiday season. Peace on earth and good will to everybody who isnt a member of the Trump administration. Or his personal lawyer.

Bret: I have a bad feeling that Trump is to political scandal what Typhoid Mary Mallon was to typhoid fever: He spreads it widely but is somehow immune to it himself.

Gail: Hey, I like that analogy.

Bret: Trump will be impeached and we will no doubt learn all sorts of scuzzy details regarding his family, his associates, their associates, and all of their associations. But at the end of the day, hell be acquitted in the Senate, possibly without a single Republican voting in favor of conviction, and maybe even with a Democrat or two voting for acquittal. And hell herald it as his most triumphant vindication yet.

In the meantime, unemployment is at 3.5 percent and may go even lower. And Democrats strike me as nearly as hostile to one another as they are to Trump. Thats no way to beat an incumbent who already enjoys a huge fund-raising advantage.

Gail: Well get over our hostilities when its down to Trump vs. X. Dont you think? I predict even your worse-case-scenario Elizabeth Warren would start looking good to you if shes the only alternative.

Bret: Not to me! And Im the kind of reasonable (well, semi-reasonable) party-switching voter the Democratic nominee, whoever it ends up being, is going to need to attract in order to beat Trump. Please, Democrats, dont make me wind up voting for Bill Weld just to salve my conscience and save my wallet. Nominate a moderate!

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. Wed like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And heres our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

See the rest here:
Can Any of the Democratic Candidates Save the Party From Itself? - The New York Times

More than 180 House Democrats joined a nearly united Republican caucus Wednesday night to pass a sweeping $738 billion military spending bill that gives President Donald Trump his long-sought "Space Force," free rein to wage endless wars, and a green light to continue fueling the humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen.

"Every member of Congress who voted to give the most corrupt, unhinged, and unstable president in history $738 billion to fight endless wars...must never tell us that we cannot afford Medicare for All or a Green New Deal." Warren Gunnels, Sanders senior adviser

Just 48 members of the House, including 41 Democrats, voted against the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which increases the Pentagon budget by $22 billion. The final vote was 377-48.

"This NDAA is atrocious, and it's very depressing that only 48 members of congress voted against it," tweeted anti-war group CodePink.

In a floor speech ahead of Wednesday's vote, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), the most vocal opponent of the NDAA in the House, said "there are many things you can call the bill, but it's Orwellian to call it progressive." Khanna was standing across the aisle from Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), who hailed the measure as "the most progressive defense bill we have passed in decades."

"Let's speak in facts," said Khanna. "This defense budget is $120 billion more than what Obama left us with. That could fund free public college for every American. It could fund access to high-speed, affordable internet for every American. But it's worse. The bipartisan amendment to stop the war in Yemen: stripped by the White House. The bipartisan amendment to stop the war in Iran: stripped by the White House."

My friend @RepRoKhanna is right: it is Orwellian for Congress to hand over billions of dollars worth of weapons and bombs to a president waging a horrific, unconstitutional war in Yemenand call that progressive. pic.twitter.com/6SUmUUhv3q

Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) December 11, 2019

According to the New York Times, Smithchairman of the House Armed Services Committeenegotiated several provisions of the NDAA directly with Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser.

"It was Mr. Kushner who helped broker a deal to create the Space Force, a chief priority of the president's, in exchange for the paid parental leave [for federal employees]," the Times reported Wednesday. "It was also Mr. Kushner who intervened on measures targeting Saudi Arabia that would have prohibited arms sales or military assistance to the Saudi-led intervention in Yemen. He said they were nonstarters for the White House."

Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I-Vt.) foreign policy adviser Matt Duss expressed outrage that Democrats allowed Kushnerwho has close ties to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salmanto kill an amendment that would have helped end U.S. complicity in the world's worst humanitarian crisis.

Congrats to Democratic leadership on getting outnegotiated by JARED KUSHNER. On a provision that was already passed by bipartisan majorities in Congress. To end US support for a war that has created to the world's worst humanitarian catastrophe.

Great goddam job. https://t.co/JmYd57lgds

Matt Duss (@mattduss) December 11, 2019

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), who voted against the NDAA, noted in a statement that the final version also stripped out her House-passed amendment that would have repealed the 2002 Iraq Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF).

"With the release of the Afghanistan Papers, it is especially imperative that we take a hard look at our military spending and authorizations," said Lee, the only member of Congress to vote against the war in Afghanistan in 2001. "I can tell you: it is an appalling, but not shocking read for those of us who have been working to stop endless war. It's past time to end the longest war in United States history, withdraw our troops, and bring our servicemembers home."

The 2020 NDAA now heads to the Republican-controlled Senate, where it is expected to pass. In a tweet ahead of the House vote on Wednesday, Trump praised the bill and said he would sign it into law "immediately."

"New rule: Every member of Congress who voted to give the most corrupt, unhinged, and unstable president in history $738 billion to fight endless wars, fund a bogus space force, and put our troops at risk must never tell us that we cannot afford Medicare for All or a Green New Deal," Warren Gunnels, Sanders' senior adviser, tweeted Wednesday night. "Ever."

See the original post:
'Atrocious': 188 Democrats Join GOP to Hand Trump $738 Billion Military Budget That Includes 'Space Force' - Common Dreams