Mediaboss Marketing

Republicans are moving quickly on Rep. John RatcliffeJohn Lee RatcliffeGOP presses for swift Ratcliffe confirmation to intel post Acting director of National Counterterrorism Center fired: report Acting director of national intelligence begins hiring freeze: reports MOREs (R-Texas) nomination to be director of national intelligence after a bungled rollout last year ended with Ratcliffe withdrawing from consideration.

The coronavirus pandemic, however, has already slowed the confirmation process somewhat.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard BurrRichard Mauze BurrGOP presses for swift Ratcliffe confirmation to intel post Stimulus bill to prohibit Trump family, lawmakers from benefiting from loan programs Gaetz accuses Burr of 'screwing all Americans' with stock sale MORE (R-N.C.) had initially hoped for a confirmation hearing in the first two weeks of April and a final committee vote in early May. The Senate is out until April 20, so hearings and votes will have to wait until the end of next month at the earliest.

Behind the scenes, legislative affairs officials at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) have been scheduling calls between Ratcliffe, who is at home in Texas, and Senate Intelligence Committee members.

At the urging of Burr, Ratcliffe submitted his FBI background check, financial disclosures and Senate questionnaire ahead of deadline, sources familiar tell The Hill.

There is an urgency in the Senate to fill the Cabinet-level position that has been open since Dan CoatsDaniel (Dan) Ray CoatsGOP presses for swift Ratcliffe confirmation to intel post Experts report recent increase in Chinese group's cyberattacks Acting director of national intelligence begins hiring freeze: reports MORE stepped down in August. Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell is not a popular figure in the Senate, and hes made plain to allies that he does not want to be in the role for an extended period of time.

Ratcliffes nomination is a priority for President TrumpDonald John TrumpWith VP pick, Biden can't play small ball in a long ball world Coronavirus hits defense contractor jobs Wake up America, your country doesn't value your life MORE and national security adviser Robert OBrien -- both signed off on re-nominating Ratcliffe under the impression that he would be confirmed quickly. Burr assured the White House that Ratcliffe would get the Senate support he needed before Trump re-nominated him, according to a senior intelligence official.

Sen. Burr has been supportive and helpful throughout and theres been an urgency with respect to moving this forward, said one Capitol Hill source involved in the confirmation process. Its a priority for the president and the comments weve been getting indicate that everyone feels like having a permanent DNI confirmed by the Senate should be a high priority.

Burr is a key figure in the confirmation process and hes facing pressure from conservatives to push Ratcliffe through quickly.

The North Carolina Republican infuriated many on the right for issuing a subpoena to Trumps eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., compelling him to testify about the Russia investigation after a tense, months-long standoff last year.

Thats led to lingering bad blood between Burr and top Trump allies. Many on the right are watching closely to see how Burr handles the Ratcliffe nomination.

For now, though, theyre holding their fire.

Congressman Ratcliffe will make a terrific Director of National Intelligence and should be swiftly confirmed by the Senate, he told The Hill in a statement.

Adding to the pressure on Burr is the controversy surrounding him over allegations he sold off his stock portfolio before the recent market crash based on information gleaned from confidential briefings on the coronavirus.

Burr denies that he traded on insider information, saying that he follows the markets closely and identified the coronavirus as a potentially economy-wrecking threat from public reports.

There have been calls for Burr to resign, with some pointing to daily briefings he received on the pandemic. But many of his critics on the right have been conspicuously quiet as Ratcliffes nomination proceeds.

The only reason he hasnt been thrown to the wolves is because we need him to get Ratcliffe through, said one Republican with close ties to the White House.

Sen. Susan CollinsSusan Margaret CollinsGOP presses for swift Ratcliffe confirmation to intel post Campaigns pivot toward health awareness as races sidelined by coronavirus Senate eyes quick exit after vote on coronavirus stimulus package MORE (R-Maine) will be a member to watch in the Intelligence Committee hearings, as her crucial swing vote could determine whether Ratcliffe is sent to the Senate for confirmation with a favorable or unfavorable recommendation.

Collins faces a tough reelection fight in 2020 and every vote she takes will be scrutinized or used as political ammunition by her opponents.

Collinss office did not respond to a request for comment.

Ratcliffe, meanwhile, is hunkered down preparing his defense. He has his work cut out for him.

Democrats have cast him as too political and too inexperienced, while questioning past claims about his involvement in prosecuting terrorists as part of the Justice Department.

Ratcliffes initial run for the job last year was an unmitigated disaster.

The reception from GOP senators was chilly, as some had hoped Trump would nominate Sue Gordon, the principal deputy director of national intelligence at ODNI.

Ratcliffe knew the White House was considering him for the role, but he and his staff were caught off guard when Trump unexpectedly tweeted his intention to nominate him.

That announcement set off a string of attacks from Democrats and a flood of negative news stories that Ratcliffe and his office were unprepared to deal with at the time.

They believe theyre ready now.

One argument they intend to dispel is that Ratcliffe is a Trump loyalist.

Trump first nominated Ratcliffe in 2019 only days after the Texas Republican went viral on the right for his aggressive questioning of Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) MuellerCNN's Toobin warns McCabe is in 'perilous condition' with emboldened Trump CNN anchor rips Trump over Stone while evoking Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting The Hill's 12:30 Report: New Hampshire fallout MORE, leading to a flood of stories about Ratcliffe being a Trump loyalist.

Ratcliffe is supportive of Trump and his agenda and believes both Mueller and the Intelligence Community overstepped at various points in the Russia saga.

However, Ratcliffes allies plan to make the case that its unfair to characterize him as a sycophant, noting he did not have much of a relationship with Trump before his nomination and never had a one-on-one conversation with the president until summer 2019.

Ratcliffes allies plan to make the case that its unfair to characterize him that way, noting that he did not have much of a relationship with Trump before his nomination and never had a one-on-one conversation with the president until summer 2019.

Ratcliffe represents a northeast Texas district that is one of the most conservative in the country, yet his allies note that he does not have a reputation as a conservative bomb-thrower and never joined the right-wing Freedom Caucus.

On the question of experience, Ratcliffe will talk about how he was appointed by former President George W. Bush to serve as chief of anti-terrorism and national security for the Eastern District of Texas. He later became the U.S. attorney for the district, and Ratcliffe will have former colleagues speak to how he performed his duties in an apolitical manner.

The Texas Republican has been involved with legislation for national security, cyber and intelligence issues on the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, and hes expected to point to bills he spearheaded during both the Trump and Obama administrations that were signed into law.

Ratcliffe has also been accused of overstating his involvement in prosecuting one terror case, which led to several other accusations that he had pumped up his resume.

In that case, Ratcliffe has acknowledged that he did not put terrorists in prison, as his campaign website once claimed, but rather he was appointed on the backend to research how the case resulted in a mistrial.

Ratcliffes team has spent the past few weeks pulling together Department of Justice (DOJ) records and old media reports they say will prove his involvement in other high-level terrorism cases that have been called into question.

Theyre telling lawmakers that most of what they might have heard about his lack of experience or about how hes overstated his involvement in terror cases is untrue.

Republicans control 53 seats in the Senate and Ratcliffe needs at least 50 votes to be confirmed. Administration officials are confident hes on the right path.

The idea that youre not supposed to have a loyalist in your own Cabinet is ridiculous, said the senior intelligence official. And its simply disingenuous to say Ratcliffe, who has been dealing with these issues at DOJ and on the House Intelligence committee, doesnt have enough experience.

View original post here:
GOP presses for swift Ratcliffe confirmation to intel post | TheHill - The Hill

Like so many of Donald Trump's bad ideas, the first sign of trouble came in a tweet. Shortly before midnight (ET) on Sunday, the president published an all-caps missive that read, "We cannot let the cure be worse than the problem itself. At the end of the 15 day period, we will make a decision as to which way we want to go!"

It was the first public sign that the Republican was prepared to retreat from the fight against the coronavirus pandemic. As of Monday, Trump apparently eyed March 31 as the day in which the federal response would change direction. A day later, he pointed to Easter, which this year falls on April 12.

Yesterday, the president sent a letter to governors, and while it didn't give a detailed timeline, the document said he intends to label different parts of the country as high risk, medium risk, or low risk. The idea, evidently, would be to use the labels as a guide: low-risk areas would ease their social-distancing measures and related efforts, while high-risk areas would not.

It's a deeply flawed plan, drafted for dubious reasons: Trump believes retreat will give the economy a boost, and the public-health consequences are a price he's prepared to pay.

Get the msnbc newsletter.

That's hopelessly misguided, and as Slate noted yesterday, even some in the president's party have been willing to say so.

The Donald TrumpFox News feedback loop has been on a terrifying kick this week about how you can't make the "cure" for the coronavirus pandemic (staying home so you don't get infected/infect others with a deadly respiratory virus) worse than the disease itself, because having too many people at home harms "the economy," and so everyone needs to "get back to work" at the end of a 15-day social distancing period, which Trump claims began last week. This is such a shortsighted reading of what's good for "the economy" that even hard-line Republicans are disagreeing with it.

Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), for example, explained, "There will be no normally functioning economy if our hospitals are overwhelmed and thousands of Americans of all ages, including our doctors and nurses, lay dying because we have failed to do what's necessary to stop the virus."

She didn't specifically reference the president, but given the context, she didn't have to.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) struck a similar note, arguing, "Try running an economy with major hospitals overflowing, doctors and nurses forced to stop treating some because they can't help all, and every moment of gut-wrenching medical chaos being played out in our living rooms, on TV, on social media, and shown all around the world. There is no functioning economy unless we control the virus."

But I was especially struck by Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine's (R) line:

"I've been asked if I had a reaction to the president's statements yesterday. I think we are aligned. We want to get this over with ASAP. We want people back at work. The frustration he has, I share it. Each day we can't move forward is frustrating. We're all in this together. The truth is that protecting people and protecting the economy are not mutually exclusive. In fact, one depends on the other. We save our economy by first saving lives. And we have to do it in that order."

It's not easy for a governor to adopt the opposite of Trump's line, while simultaneously saying he's "aligned" with Trump, but DeWine is no doubt aware of the president's capacity for criticism, and so it led him to adopt this carefully worded line.

See more here:
Even some Republicans aren't on board with Trump's retreat plan - MSNBC

Until they can shed the blinders that keep them chained to failed policies, they are a party doomed to repeat their mistakes.

As Congress nears completion on a $2.2 trillion stimulus plan to combat the economic effects of the coronavirus, Im tempted to suggest that were all socialists now. In the midst of an extreme crisis, weve all turned to the federal government as the one entity that is able to mitigate the damage.

Of course, admitting to all of that would be anathema to Republicans. But one of the marks of a healthy individual or organization is the ability to learn from mistakes. So it is at a moment like this that a healthy response from those on the right would be to re-examine the foundational principles that have crippled their ability to deal with the kind of crisis we face today.

It is becoming clear that that is not going to happen. Writing for The Federalist, Ben Weingarten lists the 5 paradigm shifts the Wuhan virus has revealed that Americans need (and yes, he gives himself away with the reference to the Wuhan virus).

1. Communist China is a global menace blah, blah, blah, blame China. Weve beenhearinga lot about that one.

2. Coronavirus Starkly Illustrates Globalisms Downsides pretending that walls and borders can stop a virus, Weingarten writes:

This series of events perfectly illustrates the downsides to the globalist agenda of open borders, global political institutions, and global economic integration at all costs. It perfectly illustrates the merits of an America First, nationalist agenda, including a focus on border control, national sovereignty, and eschewing of global institutions, as well as an economic independence combined with truly free, fair, and reciprocal trade.

3. We Must Establish Principles for Dealing with Crises this relates to the current conversation on the right about doing a cost-benefit analysis on lives lost vs. damage to the economy. Weingarten is merely saying that we should cost out how many lives were willing to put at risk in a crisis ahead of time.

4. The GOP Needs a Real Response for Democrats Games this one is basically an attempt to paint Republicans as victims who are being oppressed by those nasty Democrats.

Democrats will shamelessly use crises to cram their policies down our throats. Do Republicans have any answer to this?Have Republicans formulated a counter-response not only for that possibility, but for their own policies that cut in the opposite direction? Where is the GOP counter-agenda?

Weingarten actually has a point. For years now Ive been saying that, other than xenophobia and tax cuts for the wealthy, the entire Republican agenda has been to simply obstruct what Democrats propose. But notice that there is no attempt to suggest pragmatic options that might actually work. Everything is simply viewed through the lens of partisanship as a counter-agenda.

5. We Need to Get Our Fiscal House in Order the idea here is that, having just allocated trillions of dollars to deal with a pandemic, we need to do a better job of cutting federal spending. For Republicans, getting our fiscal house in order never has anything to do with the revenue side of the equation. So Weingarten didnt bother to mention the tax cut giveaway that already had the federal government bleeding red ink.

This is what passes for an analysis of our situation from conservatives. It is an attempt to take the failed policies of the past and simply dig deeper into the hole they created. That is discouraging, to say the least.

Until the Republican Party can shed the blinders that keep them chained to these failed policies, they are a party doomed to repeat their mistakes and then lie in order to avoid being held accountable.

If you enjoyed this article, consider making a donation to help us produce more like it. The Washington Monthly was founded in 1969 to tell the stories of how government really worksand how to make it work better. Fifty years later, the need for incisive analysis and new, progressive policy ideas is clearer than ever. As a nonprofit, we rely on support from readers like you.

Yes, Ill make a donation

Read more here:
Republicans Are Learning All the Wrong Lessons From the Coronavirus Crisis - Washington Monthly

WASHINGTON (NEXSTAR) Senators have come to an agreement on the stimulus package to aid the American economy and people. But some lawmakers believe this shouldve been finished last weekend.

Senate Democrat and Republican leaders say they now agree on a $2 trillion emergency stimulus package.

Now, what we need to make sure is that the dollars that are appropriated and authorized actually get out to the communities in need as quickly as possible, Virginia Sen. Mark Warner said.

Warner and West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin say the bill will help keep Americans afloat due to the coronavirus.

It was hard getting there and sometimes the partisanship would fight for whatever they believed in, but what it ended up is we have a good bill right now, Manchin said.

The stimulus package provides direct payments to many Americans and emergency loans to small businesses and companies. But Senate Republicans believe this shouldve been passed days ago.

Theres really not vast differences here. The tweaking that was done I think was a political exercise, unfortunately, West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito said.

Capito and Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey are frustrated by the process.

Is it perfect? Absolutely not. Are there things in there I dont like? Absolutely. I wouldve done this differently, Toomey said.

But Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine says the changes Democrats made to the bill are important.

The Senate bill that was on the table Sunday, would not have protected the lowest-income workers, would not have had the expansion for unemployment insurance to pick up everybody, Kaine said.

Once this is done, Senator Kaine says lawmakers may begin work on a fourth relief bill, if needed.

Here is the original post:
Republicans and Democrats agree on $2 trillion stimulus plan, but some think it shouldve happened earlier - WAVY.com

Click to expand

UP NEXT

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) caused a stir Monday night by going on Fox News and suggesting older people like him needed to take a chance with their lives in the name of reopening the economy during the coronavirus outbreak.

The man in charge of making that decision in Texas, though, has a very different take. As he confronts imposing even stricter measures for the Lone Star State, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) responded Tuesday to a question about Patricks comments.

I will base my decision as governor of the state of Texas on what physicians say, Abbott said. If the goal is to get the economy going, the best thing we can do to get the economy going is to get covid-19 behind us.

Subscribe to the Post Most newsletter: Todays most popular stories on The Washington Post

President Trump has leaned hard into the idea of reopening the economy in recent days, but as has been noted, he only has so much power to do so. Its the governors who issue stay-at-home orders and decide what opens and what doesnt in their states.

Few of them are echoing Trump right now, which suggests that even if Trump decides he wants to reopen things on Tuesday, he set a target date of Easter, April 12 he wont be able to do it in any large measure.

Slideshow by photo services

Another Republican governor, Marylands Larry Hogan, had some choice words for Trumps idea on Tuesday, referring to an imaginary clock.

We dont think that were going to be in any way ready to be out of this in five or six days, or whenever this 15 days is up from the time that they started this imaginary clock, Hogan said on CNN. Most people think that were weeks away from the peak, if not months.

South Dakota Gov. Kristi L. Noem (R), whose state matches the description of less-affected areas that Trump has suggested could see reopenings in relatively short order, also indicated that shes looking at a longer time frame.

This situation is not going to be over in a week, said Noem, whose state has just over two dozen cases. We have another eight weeks until we see our peak infection rate.

She added, Any changes we make for how we conduct our daily lives have to be sustained.

Democrats had even more choice words for Trumps proposal, with Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker saying Trump was not taking into account the true damage that this will do to our country if we see truly millions of people die. Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer said Trumps off-the-cuff statements are really going to undermine our ability to protect people. California Gov. Gavin Newsom said he and Trump are clearly operating under a different set of assumptions.

New York Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (D) said: If you ask the American people to choose between public health and the economy, then its no contest. No American is going to say accelerate the economy at the cost of human life. Job one has to be save lives. That has to be the priority.

But plenty of Republicans also made their differences rather clear.

The truth is that protecting people and protecting the economy is not mutually exclusive, said Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine (R). In fact, one depends upon the other. The fact is we save our economy by first saving lives, and we have to do it in that order.

DeWine added, When people are dying, when people dont feel safe, this economy is not coming back.

DeWine, though, maintained that he was generally aligned with Trump on coronavirus, and he wasnt the only one declining to completely distance himself from the president. Democratic Oregon Gov. Kate Brown said she felt she understood Trumps inclination.

I am not interested in unnecessarily closing down businesses and taking jobs if we dont need to do that, said Brown, who issued tough restrictions on Monday. The goal of my executive order was to balance those competing demands. While I dont agree with what the president said and how he said it, I think thats what he was trying to say.

Brown added: When I was on the phone with him earlier this week, he clearly said that these difficult decisions are in the hands of governors. So I would expect that it to stay that way.

Thats the key takeaway. However much Trump wants to reopen the country, hell need governors to cooperate with that. The governors listed above represent five of the seven biggest states and more than 40 percent of the U.S. population, and theyre just the ones who have weighed in so far. Most of the other biggest states are also run by Democrats, who wouldnt be as inclined to align themselves with Trump on a controversial proposal.

As president, Trump can change the federal guidance, but its just that: guidance. Experts say he doesnt have many legal tools to override the precautions taken by state and local officials.

These governors also have to deal with problems on a more micro level and are more directly held responsible for what happens in their states. Any of them who would begin opening things up would put themselves in line for whatever criticism might follow from the fallout, and it would be much easier to readily quantify the effects of those decisions in their states particularly if they can be compared with other states that took tougher stances.

If Trump truly wants to set the ball in motion on this, hes got about 50 people he should be talking to about it. Right now, they seem pretty skeptical.

See the rest here:
Trump needs governors to reopen the economy. Even Republican ones aren't on board. - msnNOW