Mediaboss Marketing

Senate Republicans fed up with the Democrats' refusal to allow confirmation votes on a slew of critical appointments - including the high-profile case of the Trump administration's first openly gay ambassadorial nominee may move more aggressively to finally break the logjam.

"It's time to end this partisan spectacle. We have 78 more nominees for various jobs whove made it through their committee hearings and are waiting for a vote on this floor," Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said on the floor of the Senate last week. "Most of these people have bipartisan support, they can be confirmed easily."

Barrasso wants to change a rule that allows for 30 hours of Senate discussion for each nominee, which Republicans say effectively allows Democrats to jam up the appointment process to a ridiculously slow crawl. Barrasso wants to limit the number of hours of discussion down to eight - a standard Democrats themselves supported under the Obama administration.

TRUMP ACCUSES DEMS OF SLOW-WALKING 'HUNDREDS' OF NOMINATIONS

"Its time to return to the rules for debating nominations that the Senate used four years ago Democrats controlled the Senate at the time and a Democrat was making the nominations, that was President Obama," Barrasso said.

Richard Grenell was nominated by Trump to be ambassador to Germany last year, but remains among those held up in the process.

The logjam holding up one particular nomination has attracted more attention in recent weeks, and may be contributing to the effort to change the rules. Richard Grenell, a conservative and experienced foreign policy expert who is openly gay, was nominated by Trump to be ambassador to Germany last year, but remains among those held up in the process.

Grenell's nomination, which has been championed by a broad range of Republican and conservative officials and commentators, recently picked up the support of a liberal gay rights group, the Harvey Milk Foundation.

I understand those who are frustrated with the Trump administration and the actions the Trump administration has taken who have also opposed Grenell, Stuart Milk, the co-founder of the group, told the New York Times. And I think thats misguided."

In response to the growing calls to approve Grenell, Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., last week went to the floor of the Senate and called for a unanimous voice consent to push the nomination through. But Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., objected, citing his objections to some comments Grenell, a former Fox News contributor, posted on his Twitter feed. According to Merkley, some of Grenell's tweets showed "a complete disregard for the Senate confirmation process."

Grenells supporters have pushed back strongly on Merkleys objections, and say Grenells tweets since he was nominated last fall have focused on foreign policy issues. His supporters have taken their case to twitter, through #confirmgrenell and other online efforts.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration has also stepped up its effort to push through Grenell's nomination. Speaking at a White House press briefing last month, spokesperson Sarah Sanders cited the Democrats' "historic obstruction" in blocking that and the growing number of other nominations.

"Mr. Grenell, a Harvard-educated experienced diplomat, was the longest-serving U.S. spokesperson at the United Nations. He was nominated in September of last year. He was reported out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with bipartisan support. He is waiting to represent America's interest and be our country's top voice in a G-7 country," Sanders said.

The hyper-political delay on Mr. Grenell puts our national security and America's foreign policy interests in jeopardy," Sanders said. "The Senate should move to confirm him immediately."

A range of foreign policy experts have also expressed their concern over the lack of a U.S. ambassador to Germany. The U.S.-Germany relationship is a critical one, particularly with the Berlin government's involvement in issues like the Iran nuclear deal, trade, and NATO security.

The holdup of Grenells nomination has also irritated German politicians and the media.

"America needs a voice in Germany!" read the headline of a commentary piece by Florian von Heintze, the Deputy Editor-in-Chief of BILD. "When the German-America relationship suffers, that damages Germany. We have no more an important ally in the world.

Read more:
Republicans push to end Dems' stranglehold on key ...

President Donald Trump and Rep. Kevin Brady. Jonathan Ernst/Reuters

House Republicans are stepping up their campaign to stop or alter President Donald Trump's most recent economic policy announcement: broad-based tariffs on imports of aluminum and steel.

More than 100 House Republicans sent a letter to Trump on Wednesday urging him to soften the blow of the recently announced tariffs, which are taxes on imports, and instead target China directly with trade action.

"We support your resolve to address distortions caused by China's unfair practices, and we are committed to acting with you and our trading partners on meaningful and effective action," the letter said. "But we urge you to reconsider the idea of broad tariffs to avoid unintended negative consequences to the US economy and its workers."

In a statement accompanying the letter, Rep. Kevin Brady, the chairman of the House Ways and Means committee who's leading the GOP's push against the tariffs 25% for steel and 10% for aluminum attempted to back Trump while critiquing the policy.

"We're writing today to say: we stand with you in taking tough action to keep America safe and our economy strong," Brady said. "At the same time, we're urging the President to tailor these tariffs so American businesses can continue to trade fairly with our partners, sell American-made products to customers all over the world, and hire more workers here at home."

The authors listed a few major concerns about how the tariffs could affect the US economy, such as increasing prices for consumers and raising costs for businesses that rely on the metals to make their products.

Additionally, the lawmakers argue, the negative consequences of the tariffs could undo any positive economic boost from the new GOP tax law. Losing that could also undercut the party's key message for midterm elections later this year.

To mitigate these issues, Brady and the other signatories suggested allowing US companies to apply for an exemption from the tariffs if they are unable to fill their metal needs domestically. They said the administration should also regularly review the measure to determine whether it is having the intended effect.

Republican leaders have been pressuring Trump to ease up on the tariffs since he announced them unexpectedly last week.

House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have both expressed misgivings about the tariffs over the past few days, and other Republicans have offered less-than-glowing opinions of Trump's move.

"This is not a real-estate transaction," Sen. John Cornyn, the second-highest-ranking GOP senator, told reporters on Tuesday. "You could maybe walk away from a real-estate transaction we really can't walk away from these trade agreements without jeopardizing the economy."

Trump is expected to formally sign off on the tariffs on Thursday at 3:30 p.m. ET.

Original post:
Republicans, GOP trying to strop Trump tariffs - Business Insider

WASHINGTON Republicans on Capitol Hill reacted angrily to President Donald Trump's announcement Thursday that he is going forward with new tariffs on steel and aluminum, arguing that the move will harm the economy and that it threatens to start a broader trade war.

And while there are limits to what they can do to stop it, members are contemplating measures that could block the president from fully implementing his proposal.

"I don't think Republicans will put up with this, and I personally believe that we may be able to stop it in the Congress," Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said.

The president announced a 10 percent tax on imported aluminum and a 25 percent tax on imported steel, carving out exceptions for imports from Canada and Mexico. But those exemptions weren't enough to placate congressional Republicans who have traditionally opposed protectionist action on trade.

GOP leaders had lobbied the White House from moving forward, writing letters, speaking out in the media and through outreach to the president and his advisers.

During a conference call between White House officials and GOP Hill staffers Thursday, administration representatives requested favorable comments from members on the presidents plan, a suggestion that the staff in one office laughed at, according to a Republican aide.

In a rare rebuke of the president, Republicans are vowing to continue challenging him in ways that could result in either new legislation or support for expected legal challenges to the move.

"I disagree with this action and fear its unintended consequences," House Speaker Paul Ryan said. "There are unquestionably bad trade practices by nations like China, but the better approach is targeted enforcement against those practices."

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the exemptions for Canada and Mexico are not enough.

"Members of the Senate, myself included, are concerned about the scope of the proposed tariffs on steel and aluminum and their impact on American citizens and businesses, including many I represent in Kentucky," McConnell said.

And Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., said that the president's "bad ideas" will kill steel jobs.

"You have 140,000 steel production workers. Some of them will be mildly helped by the presidents tariffs. Far more jobs will be lost for other factory workers," Sasse said.

Republicans are exploring ways to blunt the presidents authority on an issue on which they disagree.

Congress has the authority to act on trade issues, but the pendulum has swung in recent years, through court cases and by Congress delegating its authority to the executive branch.

"The Constitution gives the responsibility to the Congress, and the Congress has consistently delegated these powers to the executive branch," Sasse said.

Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., introduced legislation that would nullify the tariffs.

"I urge my colleagues to pass it before this exercise in protectionism inflicts any more damage on the economy," Flake said in a statement.

And Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, has legislation that would attempt to rein in the president on trade by having trade action going through a congressional approval process. The president would have to submit a report to Congress before raising any trade barriers. And both bodies of Congress would have to pass a joint resolution approving any unilateral trade action.

"We'll continue to do oversight on this," Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., said.

View original post here:
Congressional Republicans threaten action over Trump's ...

Republicans vs Conservatives

Republicans and Conservatives have started to air out their differences more vocally and more pronounced in the past couple of years, though it was said that all Republicans were supposedly conservatives.

Republicans

Republicans can refer to a supporter of a republic. It refers to the people who believe in the form of government wherein freedom from dictatorship rules. Republicans believe that the government has no right to tax its people with amounts that are unrealistic in comparison to the recent economy. Republicans also promote small enterprise to promote the economy. Republican is one of the 2 major political parties in the United States.

Conservatives

Conservatives are group of individuals, mostly republicans who have a different view or philosophy in the political world. Conservatives have both a political and social philosophy that allows traditional institutions to be upheld and maintained in the government. It also allows and assists the social changes that are occurring every day. There are other conservatives who would rather maintain how things were and would rather have stability instead of change.

Difference Between Republicans and Conservatives

Republicans are political party while conservatives believe in the fiscal policy also called as philosophies. Republicans believe that by using tax money, the state will progress. Conservatives on the other hand, believe that tax money should not be wasted. Conservatives means that the government should not waste the peoples money but rather should spend less in order to gain more. Republicans are members of the Republican Party whereas conservatives are members of the party who has a more conservative view of the government. Republicans may or may not be a conservative political member.

Both revolve around politics and are quite disgruntled by the fact that their differences are not made more pronounce. As mentioned, republicans are political party members but do not mean that they are all conservative in terms of political views.

In brief:

Republican is a political party whereas conservative is a philosophy.

Republicans are for tax money to be used while conservatives believe otherwise.

Cite This Page"Difference Between Republicans and Conservatives." DifferenceBetween.Com. March 30, 2011.

Read more from the original source:
Difference Between Republicans and Conservatives

Donald Trumps utter unfitness for the presidency has been laid bare in Michael Wolffs new book. What will it take for his party to remove him from office?

What did you think would be the Republican reaction to the latest revelations about Donald Trump? Did you expect the partys luminaries to drop their collective head into their hands, or to crumple into a heap in despair at the state of the man they anointed as president of the United States?

Theyd certainly have had good reason. In the book Fire and Fury, which on Thursday received the greatest possible endorsement namely a cease and desist order from Trumps personal lawyers the journalist Michael Wolff paints a picture of a man whose own closest aides, friends and even family believe is congenitally unfit to be president.

The Trump depicted in the book is ignorant: the adviser who tried to teach him about the constitution could get no further than the fourth amendment before Trumps eyes glazed over. He doesnt read, or even skim, barely having the patience to take in a headline. Some allies try to persuade Wolff that attention deficit disorder is part of Trumps populist genius: he is post-literate total television.

The Republicans have predicted many times that Trump would change. They've been wrong every time. He wont change

He is also loathsome: we read that a favourite sport of Trumps was tricking friends wives to sleep with him. He is weird, especially in the bedroom: having clashed with his secret service bodyguard over his insistence that he be able to lock himself into his quarters (Melania has separate accommodation), he demanded the installation of two extra TV sets, so he could watch three cable news channels at once. He heads back under the covers as early as 6.30pm, munching a cheeseburger as he soaks up hours of Fox and CNN. If there are crumbs, the chambermaid cant change the sheets: he insists that he strip the bed himself.

We learn that Trump believes Saturday Night Live is damaging to the nation and that it is fake comedy; that daughter Ivanka wants to be president herself and that privately she mocks her fathers nature-defying combover. And, perhaps most amusingly, we get an answer to the question that has long enraged Trump: the identity of the mystery leaker behind the stream of stories of White House chaos and fratricidal dysfunction that have appeared since he took office. It turns out that the president rants endlessly on the phone to his billionaire friends, who feel no duty of confidentiality. In other words, the leaker Trump seeks is himself.

Given all this material, youd forgive congressional Republicans for being glum. Alternatively, youd understand if they tried to denounce the book, perhaps joining those who question Wolffs methods, believing he too often strays from corroborated facts and cuts journalistic corners. But that has not been the reaction.

Instead, the official campaign account for Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate, tweeted a gif of McConnell grinning mightily. And that smirk captured the mood of many of his colleagues. What do they have to smile about? Theyre pleased because they believe Fire and Fury marks the downfall of Steve Bannon, the former chief strategist to Trump and source of some of the books most scathing lines. It was Bannon who told Wolff that Trump had lost it, and Bannon who described the meeting Donald Trump Jr had with a Russian lawyer convened for the express purpose of receiving dirt on Hillary Clinton as treasonous.

Trumps response came in the form of a long and furious statement that loosely translates into New Yorkese as Youre dead to me which delighted establishment Republicans who have long seen Bannon as the enemy within.

It would be nice if this loathing were rooted in ideological principle, with Republicans despising Bannon as the apostle of an ultra-nationalist isolationism and xenophobia that could tip the US and the world towards a 1930s-style catastrophe. (Recall that Bannon once promised Wolff the Trump administration would be as exciting as the 1930s.)

But the truth is that Bannon posed a threat to McConnell and his ilk, vowing to run insurgent, Trump-like candidates against establishment Republicans in primary contests (just as he did, in vain, in Alabama last year). If Bannon is broken, they can sleep more easily.

Some go further, believing that, as Bannon dies, so does Bannonism. They speculate that, with the ties to his onetime evil genius severed, Trump might now moderate, becoming a more conventional, focused occupant of the Oval Office. This is delusional, twice over.

First, its true that things look bad for Bannon now: he has apparently lost the financial backing of the billionaire Mercer family, and its possible he stands to lose control of his far-right Breitbart media empire. But he understands Trump and knows that, if youre ready to grovel and flatter, a rapprochement is always possible. Hence Bannons declaration on Thursday that Trump is a great man.

But the more enduring delusion is that Trump is poised to moderate. Republicans predicted he would change once the primaries of 2016 were under way. Then they said he would change once hed won the party nomination. Or when the presidential election campaign proper began. Or when hed won the election. Or once hed taken the oath of office. They were wrong every time. He wont change. Trump is Trump.

The sheer persistence of this delusion points to another one: the hope that Republicans will finally decide enough is enough and do the right thing by ousting this unfit president. The Wolff book has prompted another flurry of that speculation, focused this time on the 25th amendment of the constitution, which allows for the removal of a president deemed unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.

In an article this week, Wolff provides arresting evidence of mental deterioration. He writes that Trump would tell the same three stories, word-for-word, inside 30 minutes, unaware he was repeating himself. Now it was within 10 minutes. He adds: At Mar-a-Lago, just before the new year, a heavily made-up Trump failed to recognise a succession of old friends. But the 25th amendment requires the agreement of the vice-president, a majority of the cabinet and, ultimately, both houses of Congress. We are, once again, up against the sobering truth of the US constitution: it is only as strong as those willing to enforce it. And, today, that means the Republican party.

These latest revelations prove yet again what a vile, narcissistic and dangerous man we have in the Oval Office, wielding, among other things, sole, unchecked authority over the worlds mightiest nuclear arsenal. But the reaction to them proves something else too. That he remains in place only thanks to the willing connivance of his Republican enablers. As culpable as he is, they share in his damnation.

Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist

View original post here:
Fire and Fury confirms our worst fears about the Republicans