Mediaboss Marketing

In May 2023, Senator Charles E. Grassley, a chief antagonist of President Biden, strode to the Senate floor with some shocking news: He had learned, he said, of a document in the F.B.I.s possession that could reveal a criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Biden.

Mr. Grassley, an Iowa Republican, suggested to any Americans listening that there was a single document that could confirm the most sensational corruption allegations against Mr. Biden and that the Federal Bureau of Investigation was engaging in a coverup.

Did they sweep it under the rug to protect the candidate Biden? he asked conspiratorially.

Over the next few months, Mr. Grassleys quest to make public the allegation laid out in an obscure document known as an F.B.I. Form 1023 became a fixation, and a foundation of the growing Republican push to impeach Mr. Biden as payback for Democrats treatment of former President Donald J. Trump.

At the center of it all was the unsubstantiated accusation that Mr. Biden had taken a $5 million bribe from the executive of a Ukrainian energy company, Burisma.

But what neither Mr. Grassley nor any of the other Republicans who amplified the claims said in their breathless statements was that F.B.I. officials had warned them repeatedly to be cautious about the accusation, because it was uncorroborated and its credibility unknown.

All that the form proved, federal law enforcement officials explained, was that a confidential source had said something, and they had written it down. And now federal prosecutors say the claim was made up.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in.

Want all of The Times?Subscribe.

Read this article:
Ignoring Warnings, G.O.P. Trumpeted Now-Discredited Allegation Against Biden - The New York Times

President Biden on Wednesday compared the current generation of Republicans in Congress to racist lawmakers of the past, arguing that todays crop was worse because it had sought to undermine the legitimacy of elections.

Ive served with real racists, he said at an evening fund-raiser in California. Ive served with Strom Thurmond. Ive served with all these guys that have set terrible records on race. But guess what? These guys are worse. These guys do not believe in basic democratic principles.

Mr. Biden, who gave a warm eulogy at Mr. Thurmonds funeral in 2003 and apologized during the 2020 campaign for having fondly reminisced about working with Southern segregationists, offered a degree of praise for Mr. Thurmond, the long-serving senator from South Carolina and fierce opponent of integration.

By the time Strom left, he did terrible things, Mr. Biden said, according to a pool report. But he added that Mr. Thurmond ended up having more African Americans in his staff than any other member in Congress. He voted to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act.

Mr. Biden went on: Im not making him more than he was. But my point is, at least you could work with some of these guys.

House Republicans have been holding up an aid package for Ukraine and Israel passed by the Senate, with Speaker Mike Johnson resisting Mr. Bidens calls to bring the bill to a vote.

During his 2020 presidential bid, Mr. Biden faced fierce criticism from Democratic opponents for invoking two Southern segregationist senators, James O. Eastland of Mississippi and Herman Talmadge of Georgia, both Democrats, as he spoke of the Senates civility in decades past.

Weeks later, he retreated. Now, was I wrong a few weeks ago to somehow give the impression to people that I was praising those men who I successfully opposed time and again? he said. Yes, I was. I regret it. Im sorry for any of the pain and misconception I may have caused anybody.

Here is the original post:
Biden Calls Republicans in Congress 'Worse' Than Strom Thurmond - The New York Times

Republicans mounting a long-shot bid to unseat Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York selected Mike Sapraicone, a wealthy private security executive, as their preferred nominee at a party convention on Thursday.

Mr. Sapraicone, 67, has fashioned himself as an affable moderate, vowing to outwork Ms. Gillibrand and find solutions to the migrant and affordability crises that the states ruling Democrats have struggled to combat.

Its about time we had a voice in New York we havent had, he said in an interview, accusing Ms. Gillibrand of having not been seen or heard since her unsuccessful run for president in 2020.

The message easily won over the states political establishment, which believes Mr. Sapraicone represents Republicans best chance to compete in New York. Eighty-four percent of delegates voted in his favor on Thursday at the convention in Binghamton.

But the show of support apparently failed to clear his path. Rather than drop out, two conservative Republican runners-up, Josh Eisen and Cara Castronuova, signaled their intent to petition onto the ballot and allow primary voters to have the final say in June.

That would set up a potentially messy fight that could expose the deep ideological fissures dividing the party. It threatens to force Mr. Sapraicone not only to tap his campaign treasury but also to adopt more conservative positions on subjects like abortion and former President Donald J. Trump that could hurt the party in November.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in.

Want all of The Times?Subscribe.

Read the original post:
N.Y. Republicans Pick a Former Police Detective to Challenge Gillibrand - The New York Times

The split over how states should handle fertility treatments could force some abortion opponents in Congress to reckon with their support of long-standing abortion bills.

The Alabama Supreme Courts Feb. 16 ruling that frozen embryos used in in vitro fertilization or IVF are humans has ignited a firestorm over how to address personhood laws in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Courts Dobbs decision, and pushed Republicans to move quickly to keep the issue from spurring a maelstrom.

Alabama officials have since said they intend to act to protect the procedure. Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, a Republican, said she would support state measures aimed at protecting access to the procedure, and Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall said the decision would not be used to prosecute families or IVF providers.

On Friday, former President Donald Trump echoed their sentiments andcalled onAlabama legislators to protect IVF access. He also backed IVF access in every State in America.

On the federal level, IVF and other fertility treatments have received less attention than the debate over regulating abortion or contraception. But as recently as last year, 124 House Republicans including Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., co-sponsored a bill that would define life as beginning at conception.

The bill from Rep. Alex X. Mooney, R-W.Va., would grant equal protection under the 14th Amendment at fertilization or the union of a sperm and egg.

Traditionally, pregnancy has been considered as beginning at the point when the fertilized egg has been implanted in the uterus. In IVF, fertilization occurs outside of the human body.

The Senate version of this legislation, last introduced by Rand Paul, R-Ky., specifically includes a clause specifying that the bill should not be construed as a prohibition on in vitro fertilization. Paul has not reintroduced the bill since January 2021, prior to the June 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Womens Health Organization ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade.

Versions of the bill have been regularly introduced since 2004, when it was first introduced by former Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla. Prior versions of the Senate bill did not include the IVF language until 2016.

The House versions have never included IVF provisions.

Polling has widely been supportive of IVF even among those who identify as evangelical Christian or pro-life.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee issued a memo Friday telling candidates that when responding to the Alabama Supreme Court ruling, it is imperative that our candidates align with the publics overwhelming support for IVF and fertility treatments.

The memo states none of their Senate candidates support restricting fertility treatments.

In the House, some Republicans have alsobegun to distance themselves from IVF critiques including those that back the House conception bill in its current form without language protecting the right to have IVF.

Rep. Michelle Steel, R-Calif., who co-sponsors the House bill, tweeted her support for protecting IVF on Thursday.

As someone who struggled to get pregnant, I believe all life is a gift. IVF allowed me, as it has so many others, to start my family. I believe there is nothing more pro-life than helping families have children, and I do not support federal restrictions on IVF, she wrote.

Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., and David Schweikert, R-Ariz., who co-sponsored previous versions of the bill, also issued support for protecting the procedure.

Democrats have capitalized on the ruling. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris have bashed the ruling from both the White House and through their reelection campaign, and White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre issued a memo Monday highlighting House Republicans support for the bill.

Meanwhile, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Suzan DelBene told press Monday that House Republicans have continued to sign on to the bill as recently as two weeks ago.

Speaking on the same call, Reproductive Freedom for All President and CEO Mini Timmaraju said her group is pleased with Bidens response and expects to hear something in the State of the Union on the issue.

This is a mainstream position of the GOP, no matter how much they try to hide that, she said. This is in so much of the work and the background work of the allies and the leaders of these states.

The House Majority PAC, which supports Democrats, issued a memo Friday calling out 11 vulnerable Republicans who supported the House bill, saying it can guarantee that their support will be used against them over paid media in competitive House districts across the country this fall.

House Republicans have made clear they will stop at nothing including outlawing in vitro fertilization to reach their ultimate goal: banning abortion and restricting reproductive rights nationwide, DCCC spokesperson Courtney Rice told CQ Roll Call Friday.

Their anti-family agenda, which elevates these dangerously out-of-touch positions into the mainstream, will cost them their majority this fall.

Visit link:
Alabama IVF ruling spurs a GOP reckoning on conception bills - Roll Call

The House Republican leaderships Medicaid expansion bill, House Bill 1725, was made public early Monday and assigned to the Medicaid Committee.

The bill, authored by House Speaker Jason White, R-West, and Medicaid Chairwoman Missy McGee, R-Hattiesburg, is a mostly-traditional expansion bill with the addition of a work requirement, as well as several other services aimed at enhancing workforce opportunities.

Those services include skills-building training and appointing a special case liaison to enrollees incarcerated in the last three years to help with finding housing, food, health care and workforce training.

The work requirement mandates Mississippians be employed for at least 20 hours a week to be covered by expansion but it would be subject to approval by the federal government. The Biden administration has rescinded such waivers granted previously and rejected new requests for work requirements.

If a work requirement is not approved by CMS before Sept. 30, 2024, Mississippi under the House plan would have the option to either pursue litigation as Georgia has done or adopt traditional Medicaid expansion without a work requirement.

Regardless of whether or not the federal government approves the waiver, this bill would mandate a $10 copayment for nonemergency use of the emergency room.

The bill would increase eligibility to those making up to 138% of the federal poverty level, and would not include a private-care option.

Earlier this year, House Democrats introduced an expansion plan including a private-care option that would allow Mississippians who make up to twice the federal poverty level to qualify for Medicaid. Some conservatives who are open to expansion have said in the past they would favor such a private insurance option, and Democrats hoped that by including this expansion would gain more traction this session.

Including a private care option, first modeled in Arkansas version of expansion, is generally considered a more pragmatic approach because more people are paying into the system and utilizing private insurance when possible.

Many Capitol observers expected Republicans to come back with a proposal even more austere than the Democrats bill. But the GOP leaderships bill, with the exception of a work requirement which likely will not be approved is more of a traditional expansion bill.

Senate Bill 2735, authored by Kevin Blackwell, R-Southaven, is the third major expansion bill this session. The bill is structured so as to only bring forth the necessary code sections for expansion with details to be hammered out through the legislative session.

According to Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann, the Senate expansion bill will contain a work requirement and a private premiums plan.

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

See original here:
What's in the House Republican Mississippi Medicaid expansion bill? - Mississippi Today