With less than six months left until government funding runs out, lawmakers will use Biden’s request as a guide in deciding how much to send federal agencies in fiscal 2022, which begins Oct. 1.
The plan was swiftly greeted with praise from Democrats like Senate Appropriations Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), House Appropriations Chair Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and House Budget Chair John Yarmuth (D-Ky.), while progressives and Republicans fired off criticism over the Pentagon’s proposed topline.
Sanders praised the Biden administration for proposing “a much needed and substantial increase in funding for education, affordable housing, health care, environmental protection and the needs of our veterans.“ But the chair of the Senate Budget Committee said he has “serious concerns” about funding for “the bloated Pentagon.”
“At a time when the U.S. already spends more on the military than the next 12 nations combined, it is time for us to take a serious look at the massive cost over-runs, the waste and fraud that currently exists at the Pentagon,” Sanders said.
Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) said the small defense spending increase Biden has pitched “is far too much given its already rapid growth at a time of relative peace.“
“We cannot best build back better if the Pentagon’s budget is larger than it was under Donald Trump,” he said.
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), the Senate’s top GOP appropriator, said Biden’s desire to essentially flat-fund the military “signals weakness to China and Russia, who are aggressively investing in their militaries.“
“The proposal also takes a meat ax to border security funding,” Shelby said. “That signals to illegal immigrants that the flood gates will remain open on the Southern border, despite the growing crisis we already face.“
As soon as next week, Cabinet officials will trek to Capitol Hill to defend the budget proposal. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra and Veterans Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough are all scheduled to appear before House appropriators.
The president wants Congress to funnel $6.5 billion to launch a research program within the National Institutes of Health focused on diseases like cancer, diabetes and Alzheimer’s. The budget request calls for providing the Justice Department with $2.1 billion to tackle gun violence, amounting to a $232 million boost over the previous year. And more than $30 billion would flow to the extension of housing vouchers, with a focus on helping the homeless or those fleeing domestic violence.
The request is separate from Biden’s $2 trillion-plus infrastructure and jobs plan, and it only covers discretionary spending, which amounts to about a third of the federal budget. A fuller White House budget release, which will include proposals for mandatory spending and tax reform, will be released later this spring and will tie everything together, an official said.
The process of funding the government for the next fiscal year is “another important opportunity to continue laying a stronger foundation for the future and reversing a legacy of chronic disinvestment in crucial priorities,” Young wrote to lawmakers.
“Together, America has a chance not simply to go back to the way things were before the COVID-19 pandemic and economic downturn struck, but to begin building a better, stronger, more secure, more inclusive America,” she wrote.
Every major federal department would see at least a small budget hike under Biden’s proposal, with agencies like the Departments of Education and Health and Human Services receiving some of the largest increases.
“This is something that we hope will start a discussion about the right size of non-defense discretionary [spending],” a senior administration official said on Friday. “This budget is intended to right the ship in a lot of areas that I think both parties have shown a historic interest in.”
The Department of Homeland Security’s budget would nudge up by less than 1 percent, to $52 billion, after four years of significant funding hikes the Trump administration pursued for its border wall and immigration detention programs. That includes $1.2 billion for border security and no additional cash for a barrier between the U.S. and Mexico.
Congress and the White House are approaching the coming fiscal year unburdened by strict funding limits set by the 2011 Budget Control Act, which for a decade established caps on how much money Congress can spend. The current fiscal year, fiscal 2021, was the last year those limits applied.
While Biden’s budget establishes a marker about how he wants to fund both non-defense and defense programs, any government funding deal will ultimately require support from at least 10 Senate Republicans, ensuring the president’s proposed funding levels will go through a wringer of high-stakes spending negotiations that could end in short-term static funding for all programs or a government shutdown.
Once Congress adopts a budget resolution for the coming fiscal year, Democrats can also move to use the budget process to steer major legislation past a potential Senate filibuster — like the $1.9 trillion coronavirus aid bill they enacted last month without a single Republican vote in the Senate.
Good morning and welcome to Fox News First. Here’s what you need to know as you start your day …
Biden on Second Amendment gun rights: ‘No amendment is absolute’ President Biden on Thursday, in rolling out a set of executive orders on gun control, said “no amendment is absolute,” while maintaining that “nothing” he is recommending “impinges” on the Second Amendment.
“Today we’re taking steps to confront not just the gun crisis, but what is actually a public health crisis,” Biden said from the White House.
Biden is asking that the Justice Department, within a month, propose a rule to stop “ghost guns,” which are “kits” people can buy legally then fully assemble to create a functioning firearm that does not have a serial number.
The president is also asking the DOJ within 60 days to propose a rule on braces used for handguns, which make them more accurate; proposing action on “community violence intervention”; asking the DOJ to publish suggestions for “red flag” legislation; and having his administration issue a report on gun trafficking.
Biden also formally announced David Chipman as director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). CLICK HERE FOR MORE ON OUR TOP STORY.
In other developments: – Mark Steyn pushes back on Biden’s ‘gun grab’ by executive order – GOP congresswoman calls Biden a ‘tyrant’ over Second Amendment comments – JONATHAN TURLEY: Joe and Hunter Biden and ‘red flag’ gun laws – here comes the next big test for liberal media – LAWRENCE KEANE: Biden launches gun industry broadside and takes aim against Second Amendment rights – Tucker Carlson: Biden wants to take your guns, but leave criminals with theirs – Biden falsely claims gun manufacturers ‘can’t be sued’
Biden administration spending $60 million per week to care for migrant kids: report The Biden administration is spending at least $60 million per week to house the more than 16,000 migrant minors in its care, according to a report.
That funding, which amounts to $3.1 billion per year, is used to care for children in facilities run by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) after they’ve been transferred from Border Patrol. Those costs are expected to rise dramatically over the coming months, according to a Washington Post analysis.
The amount is about four times the $760 million FY2020 budget for the Small Business Administration, and four times a similar amount allotted to the SBA that year to assist small businesses getting crushed by the COVID-19 epidemic.
Currently, 8,500 children are living in pop-up sites, and 4,000 more are waiting to be transferred from border facilities. CLICK HERE FOR MORE.
In other developments: – Kamala Harris has gone 16 days without a news conference since being tapped for border crisis role – Arizona AG says Kamala Harris hasn’t responded to his invitation to tour the border – DHS Secretary Mayorkas said to agree to regular meetings with border sheriffs – Rep. Kat Cammack: Joe Biden has become ‘trafficker-in-chief’ of southern border ‘crisis’ – 275 sheriffs sign letter to Biden on border crisis: ‘Reckless effort’ to put politics before safety – Biden administration announces sky-high border numbers, looks to blame Trump
Police called to Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s California mansion multiple times Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have experienced a rough welcome to their new home state of California.
Having first relocated from Britain to Vancouver Island, Canada, then to Markle’s native Golden State in July 2020, the royal couple’s security at home has apparently been keeping busy at a monthly clip.
On Thursday, The Telegraph reported that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have had the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Department called to their Montecito, California, mansion a whopping nine times in as many months.
The nature of the calls are listed as phone requests, alarm activations and property crimes, the publication said, citing data obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. CLICK HERE FOR MORE.
In other developments: – Prince William wants to reunite privately with Prince Harry before unveiling statue of Princess Diana: source – Prince William to make virtual speech for 2021 BAFTA awards celebrating film, TV – Prince William told Prince Harry he’s ‘putting fame over family’ after Oprah interview, source claims – Meghan Markle was once told by Queen Elizabeth she could continue acting, Princess Diana’s biographer claims
TODAY’S MUST-READS: – Missing California mother’s brother-in-law: I’ve ‘lost all faith’ in local PD, but ‘we will not give up’ – NBC News mocked for saying red states’ lower COVID stats have ‘experts’ dumbfounded – Arizona GOP congressman introduces No Vaccine Passport Act – Boyfriend of missing woman in US Virgin Islands verbally abusive to former stepdaughter: ex-wife – GREG GUTFELD: America teeters on edge of mayhem, with CNN ready to push us over – Derek Chauvin trial: Lack of oxygen killed George Floyd, not drugs, expert says – David Wells blasts MLB moving All-Star Game out of Atlanta, admits ‘I don’t watch baseball anymore’
THE LATEST FROM FOX BUSINESS: – Amazon takes early lead as union vote count gets underway – US sanctions Chinese computer makers in widening tech fight – McDonald’s to hire 25,000 staff in Texas this month – Cardboard box prices skyrocket as COVID-19 pandemic causes spike in online orders – Boeing sues, cancels contracts with Air Force One supplier – Real-life ‘Jurassic Park’ could probably be built ‘if we wanted to,’ Elon Musk’s Neuralink partner says
#The Flashback: CLICK HEREto find out what happened on “This Day in History.”
U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., blasted the Biden administration’s gun control plans Thursday night during an appearance on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle,” telling guest host Pete Hegseth that the Biden White House had the gun issue “exactly backwards.”
Just the fact that Biden referred to the Second Amendment as a “phony amendment” shows “in his mind he doesn’t believe it is in the Constitution, he clearly doesn’t believe in the right to keep and bear arms,” Hawley said.
“What boggles my mind,” he added, “is these liberals seem fine with criminals out on the streets having all the firearms they want — they’re fine with rioting, they’re fine with violence, so long as it’s done by criminals. So when law-abiding citizens want to own a firearm legally – as the Second Amendment guarantees – they completely lose their minds, and that’s what Biden is proposing to crack down on now.”
Not signed up yet for Fox News First? Click here to find out what you’re missing.
Fox News’ Go Watch page is now available, providing visitors with Pay TV provider options in their area carrying Fox News Channel & Fox Business Network.
Fox News First was compiled by Fox News’ Jack Durschlag. Thank you for making us your first choice in the morning! Have a great weekend, stay safe and we’ll see you in your inbox first thing Monday.
They’ll also be eligible to get the vaccine in New Hampshire.
New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu announced Thursday that the state will drop its residency requirement for vaccine appointments beginning April 19, meaning that people who live in neighboring states — or literally “anywhere” — will be allowed to come over the border for a shot.
The change comes after Sununu faced criticism for prohibiting out-of-state college students from getting the vaccine in New Hampshire. However, the Republican governor now says that New Hampshire — which is currently leading all states in vaccine supply used and first doses administered per capita — expects to have enough supply for out-of-state college students, vacation home owners, and just about anyone willing to make a trip to the Granite State.
“We are incredibly proud of the fact that our success allows the state to offer the vaccine to any person from anywhere beginning on April 19,” Sununu said in a statement to Boston.com. “New Hampshire is getting the job done.”
According to Sununu’s office, individuals must register on the state’s vaccine website to book an appointment. And out-of-staters will have to wait until April 19 to do so; the registration currently requires a New Hampshire address, and a spokesman for Sununu says that won’t change until eligibility officially expands on April 19.
The move comes after New Hampshire opened vaccine eligibility to its own residents over the age of 16 on April 2. As of Thursday, officials said 60 percent of the state’s eligible population has either been vaccinated or has scheduled an appointment. Just over 45 percent have gotten at least one shot, according to Bloomberg’s vaccine tracker.
President Joe Biden recently set April 19 as the date all states should make the vaccine available to its residents over the age of 16. It’s also the date that Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont had set to fully expand eligibility. However, officials in Massachusetts and across the country have cautioned that it may take several weeks for residents to book an appointment due to high demand.
Get Boston.com’s e-mail alerts:
Sign up and receive coronavirus news and breaking updates, from our newsroom to your inbox.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Rep. Matt Gaetz is retaining two prominent New York attorneys as he faces a Justice Department investigation into sex trafficking allegations involving underage girls.
Marc Mukasey and Isabelle Kirshner will lead the Florida Republican’s legal team, a Gaetz spokesperson said in a statement Friday.
“Matt has always been a fighter. A fighter for his constituents, a fighter for the country, and a fighter for the Constitution. He’s going to fight back against the unfounded allegations against him,” the statement said, adding that the lawyers “will take the fight to those trying to smear his name with falsehoods.”
Gaetz has not been charged with a crime and has denied any wrongdoing. He has said he plans to keep his seat.
But a potentially ominous sign occurred in a Florida court on Thursday when it was revealed that a Gaetz associate, Joel Greenberg, a former county tax collector, is working toward a plea deal. Such a move could potentially open the door for Greenberg’s cooperation against Gaetz.
Prosecutors are examining whether Gaetz and Greenberg paid underage girls or offered them gifts in exchange for sex, according to two people familiar with the matter who spoke on condition of anonymity because they could not discuss details publicly. Greenberg entered a not guilty plea Friday through his attorney to a variety of charges ranging from child sex trafficking to fraud. A judge has set a May 15 deadline for Greenberg to reach a plea deal.
Mukasey is a former federal prosecutor in New York and is the son of Michael Mukasey, a former federal judge who served as attorney general in President George W. Bush’s administration. He has represented former President Donald Trump’s family business, the Trump Organization, in tax-related investigations in New York, and defended Edward Gallagher, a Navy SEAL whose war crimes case caught Trump’s attention. Gallagher was acquitted of killing a wounded war prisoner in Iraq.
He also represented the CEO of a social media company during special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.
Kirshner represented former New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who resigned his position after being accused of physically assaulting women. No charges were filed against Schneiderman after an investigation by a special prosecutor. Kirshner’s law firm has represented several lawyers accused of criminal wrongdoing.
___
Associated Press writer Curt Anderson in Florida contributed to this report.
Chauvin, 45, is facing charges of second and third-degree murder and manslaughter in the death of Floyd on May 25, 2020.
Attorney Benjamin Crump, who is the lawyer for the Floyd family, appeared virtually on “The View” on Thursday and relayed to co-host Joy Behar that Clooney, 59, has been entrenched in societal issues so much that the Oscar-winning actor often emails Crump with ideas on how to drive social change.
Clooney, who shares three-year-old twins Alexander and Ella with wife Amal Clooney, simply wants his children to “live in a better world,” Crump said.
He added that Clooney had also emailed him about how he should respond to Chauvin’s defense lawyers’ suggestion that a drug overdose caused Floyd’s death and not Chauvin’s knee which he kept on Floyd’s neck for nearly 10 minutes.
The attorney recollected the email he had received from the “Money Monster” star.
“‘Attorney Crump, you should tell them if Derek Chauvin feels so confident in that, he should volunteer during his case, to get down on the floor in that courtroom, and let somebody come and put their knee on his neck for 9 minutes and 29 seconds and be able to see if he can survive,'” the email reportedly reads.
A rep for Clooney confirmed to Entertainment Tonight on Thursday that the actor did send the email to Crump. A rep for Clooney did not respond to Fox News’ request for comment.
During his interview on “The View,” Crump went on to say that “the experts will opine during this case that the average human being can go without oxygen from 30 seconds to 90 seconds — where George Floyd went without oxygen for over 429 seconds, and that’s why it was intentional what this officer did.”
“And I believe in my heart, Joy Behar, that he will be held criminally liable and it will hopefully set a new precedent in America,” Crump added.
George Clooney, who shares three-year-old twins Alexander and Ella with wife Amal Clooney, left, simply wants his children to ‘live in a better world,’ George Floyd family attorney Benjamin Crump told ‘The View’ on Thursday. (Reuters)
Meanwhile, in December, the “Midnight Sky” performer lamented the “pretty rotten year” 2020 had been “all the way around” in a conversation with Yahoo! Entertainment.
“Starting with Kobe Bryant dying. It’s been one catastrophe after another,” Clooney said at the time. “And all the racial unrest with the George Floyd killing and Breonna Taylor. We’ve had all of these things that have just felt oppressive towards us. I see a lot of light at the end of these tunnels.”
“All you have to do is see people like, of course, Marjorie Taylor Greene. You look at people like Matt Gaetz, who know better. I think neither of them believes the stuff they ascribe to, they just want fame,” Kinzinger said. “And so then you have to look at all that stuff and say, ‘OK, can they be defeated? Who are opponents that can actually run against them?'”
“Adam needs PACs to win elections. I don’t,” Gaetz declared. Gaetz has previously rejected accepting campaign contributions from PACS.
After the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, Kinzinger voted with nine other Republicans to impeach Trump, drawing a censure in his suburban district that has been a Republican stronghold since 1993.
On Thursday, a court hearing indicated that former tax collector Joel Greenberg, one of Gaetz’s closest friends, was likely cooperating with federal prosecutors after Greenberg was criminally charged with sex trafficking of a minor, as well as stalking, bribery and defrauding the Paycheck Protection Program.
“We believe this case is going to be a plea,” federal prosecutor Roger Handberg said at the beginning of the brief hearing in an ominous development for Gaetz. “My hope would be that it is done this month.”
WASHINGTON (AP) — Democrats in Congress are trying to pass the first major gun control legislation in more than two decades with the support of President Joe Biden, who said Thursday that it is “long past time” to do so. But they are confronting a potentially insurmountable question over what rules should govern private sales and transfers, including those between friends and extended family, as they seek Republican votes.
A bipartisan Senate compromise that was narrowly defeated eight years ago was focused on expanding checks to sales at gun shows and on the internet. But many Democrats and gun control advocates now want almost all sales and transfers to face a mandatory review, alienating Republicans who say extending the requirements would trample Second Amendment rights.
The dispute has been one of several hurdles in the renewed push for gun-control legislation, despite wide support for extending the checks. A small group of senators have engaged in tentative talks in the wake of recent mass shootings in Atlanta and Colorado, hoping to build on bipartisan proposals from the past. But support from at least 10 Republicans will be needed to get a bill through the Senate, and most are intractably opposed.
Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy, the lead Democratic negotiator on guns, said he’s been on the phone with Republican colleagues every day “making the case, cajoling, asking my friends to keep an open mind.” In an interview with The Associated Press, he said he’d discussed the negotiations personally with Biden on Thursday and that “he’s ready and willing to get more involved” in the talks.
“I think it’s important to keep the pressure on Congress,” Murphy said.
While pushing lawmakers to do more, Biden announced several executive actions to address gun violence, including new regulations for buyers of “ghost guns” — homemade firearms that usually are assembled from parts and often lack traceable serial numbers. Biden said Congress should act further to expand background checks because “the vast majority of the American people, including gun owners, believe there should be background checks before you purchase a gun.”
Still, the gulf between the two parties on private gun transactions, and a host of other related issues, has only grown since 2013, when Senate Democrats fell five votes short of passing legislation to expand background checks after a gunman killed 20 students and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary in Connecticut. That defeat was a crushing blow to advocates who had hoped for some change, however modest, after the horrific attack.
The compromise legislation, written by Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Republican Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, flamed out again in 2016, after a mass shooting in Orlando.
Starting anew with Biden in the White House, Democrats are focused on legislation passed by the House that would expand background checks to most sales and increase the number of days a buyer has to wait if a background check is not finished. Murphy said there may not be an appetite to pass those House bills without changes, but after talking to most Republicans over the last several weeks he says he has “reason to believe there is a path forward.”
Under current law, background checks are required only when guns are purchased from federally licensed dealers. While there is agreement among some Republican lawmakers, and certainly among many GOP voters, for expanding the background checks, the issue becomes murkier when the sales are informal. Examples include if a hunter wants to sell one of his guns to a friend, for example, or to his neighbor or cousin — or if a criminal wants to sell a gun to another criminal.
Democrats say private sales can lead to gun trafficking.
“What a lot of people don’t know is that people engage in private sales but they do it constantly,” said California Rep. Mike Thompson, the lead sponsor of the House bill. “They could sell hundreds of guns a year, quote-unquote, privately.”
Republicans say that requiring a background check for a sale or transfer between people who know each other would be a bridge too far. Toomey says Democrats won’t get 60 votes if they insist upon it.
“Between the sales that already occur at licensed firearms dealers, all of which require a background check, and what we consider commercial sales — advertised sales, gun shows and on the internet — that covers a vast, vast majority of all transactions,” Toomey said. “And it would be progress if we have background checks for those categories.”
Manchin also opposes the House bill requiring the universal background checks. “I come from a gun culture,” Manchin said in March. “And a law-abiding gun owner would do the right thing, you have to assume they will do the right thing.”
Murphy hinted that Democrats might be willing to compromise somewhat on the scope, saying he is committed to universal background checks, but he won’t “let the perfect be the enemy of the good.”
The House bill would apply background checks to almost all sales, with certain exceptions — including an inheritance or a “loan or bona fide gift” between close family members. Other exemptions include temporary transfers to people who need a firearm to prevent “imminent death” or are hunting.
The Manchin-Toomey compromise in 2013 included additional measures to lure support from Republicans and the National Rifle Association, which eventually opposed the bill. Those included an expansion of some interstate gun sales and a shorter period for background checks that weren’t completed — a deal-breaker for Democrats and gun control groups today.
Christian Heyne, vice president of policy at Brady Campaign, said the advocacy groups “will not allow allow for gun industry carveouts to be part of the next piece of legislation that the Senate votes on.” The bill should be “fundamentally different” than eight years ago, he said, since their movement has “only grown in momentum and strength.”
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has said he will bring gun legislation to the floor with or without 60 votes, but he has tasked Murphy with trying to reach a deal first. Murphy says that if they could win enough votes on the background checks bill, it could pave the way for even tougher measures like the assault weapons ban Biden has backed.
But most Republicans are unlikely to budge. And the NRA, while weakened by some infighting and financial disputes, is still a powerful force in GOP campaigns.
In a statement, the NRA said the House bills would restrict gun owners’ rights and “our membership has already sent hundreds of thousands of messages to their senators urging them to vote against these bills.”
This story is adapted from “Madam Speaker: Nancy Pelosi and the Lessons of Power,” which will be published April 20 by Twelve Books. Author Susan Page, the Washington Bureau chief of USA TODAY, conducted 10 interviews with Pelosi for this biography and interviewed more than 150 other friends, family members, political allies and adversaries.
November 8, 2016 – Washington, D.C.
Nancy Pelosi dressed that morning in the colors of the suffragettes, in a white pantsuit and purple top. By the end of the day, she was certain that Hillary Clinton would make history by winning the White House, nearly a century after women had won the right to vote.
As the polls were beginning to close, the House Democratic leader headed to the set of PBS NewsHour in suburban Virginia for an interview.
On the air, Pelosi projected nothing but positivity about what was going to happen. “We will, of course, retain the White House, with the election of Hillary Clinton,” she declared flatly. “It will be close, but we will regain the United States Senate. And we will pick up many seats in the House of Representatives.”
“Why are you so confident about the White House?” anchor Judy Woodruff asked.
“Because I’m confident in the American people,” Pelosi answered.
When Woodruff opened the interview by noting that Pelosi was the highest-raking female politician in American history, she replied with a smile, “I’m counting the minutes to relinquish that title.” At the end, when the journalist repeated that distinction, Pelosi looked theatrically at her watch and replied, “For the moment! For the moment!”
To the astonishment of Pelosi and just about everyone else in American politics, of course, her moment wasn’t over. When the returns were counted, the new president would be real estate magnate and reality TV star Donald Trump. Like it or not, Pelosi would keep her standing as the most powerful woman in American political history for a while longer, and one whose personal plans, known only to her confidantes, had just been upended. She had intended to step back from elective office once Hillary was in the White House. That idea was instantly shelved.
She was crushed that Hillary Clinton had lost. The two women had known each other since they met at the Democratic National Convention in 1984, when Pelosi was chair of the San Francisco host committee and Clinton was the wife of the up-and-coming governor of Arkansas. After Bill Clinton was elected president, they had occasionally clashed, notably over Hillary Clinton’s decision to address the United Nations Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995. “She was really against my going,” Clinton told me; Pelosi argued it sent the wrong signal at a time when Chinese American human rights activist Harry Wu had been arrested. But over the years they had worked in concert on Democratic politics and policy, and Pelosi had long been an advocate for more women in public office. They shared a certain kinship. Both women were trailblazers who had been attacked and caricatured by their critics.
In 2016, Nancy Pelosi was delighted by the prospect of turning over the most-powerful-woman mantle to a President Hillary Clinton.
At the time, few knew that Pelosi was making plans for the 2016 election to be her valedictory. (To be fair, some of those close to her questioned whether she actually would have followed through if Clinton had won.) After three decades as a congresswoman from California, nearly half of that time as the leader of the House Democrats, Pelosi said she was getting ready to take a breath, dote on her nine grandchildren, perhaps write her memoirs. At seventy-six years old, she was well past the retirement age for almost every workplace except Congress. With Hillary Clinton in the White House, Pelosi could be confident that the causes she had fought for would be protected, especially the Affordable Care Act that she had pushed through Congress against all odds.
After Nancy Pelosi left the PBS studio, she dropped by the headquarters of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee on Capitol Hill, then joined a poll-watching party for big donors at Maryland representative John Delaney’s town house nearby. She was on her cell phone, tracking key House races, when she began to get an inkling about what was happening.
She checked in with Pennsylvania congressman Bob Brady, a big-city pol in the mold of Pelosi’s father, who had been a three-term mayor of Baltimore. In their first conversation that night, he was upbeat. Democrats always needed a big edge from the Philadelphia vote to carry the state, and he assured her they would deliver it. In their second conversation, he struck a note of caution. “We’re going to get our vote,” he told her, but “there’s a lot coming in for the rest of the state [that was] not so good.”
“Then he called and said, ‘It’s not going to happen here,’ ” Pelosi recalled, a conversation that took her breath away.
Trump would carry Pennsylvania by less than a single percentage point, driven by turnout in small towns and rural areas and unexpected strength around industrial centers like Pittsburgh. His narrow victories in a trio of manufacturing states that Democrats had counted on – Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania – would give him a majority in the Electoral College, though he lost the national popular vote.
Even more than being disappointed that Hillary Clinton had lost, Nancy Pelosi was horrified over the candidate who had won. The shock and pain she felt that night when she realized Donald Trump would win the presidency “was physical; it was actually physical,” she told me. “Like a mule kicking you in the back over and over again.” Trump’s improbable victory changed his life and the country’s trajectory. It changed her life as well.
Republicans had won the White House and maintained majorities, albeit smaller ones, in the Senate and the House of Representatives. Their unified control of the executive and legislative branches could make it possible for them to deliver on their campaign promises to unravel the landmark health care legislation and to reverse the course President Barack Obama, with her crucial support, had set during the previous eight years on health care, climate change, nuclear proliferation, and more.
“I was like, ‘How could it be that person is going to be president of the United States?’” Pelosi told me. It wasn’t just that the glass ceiling for women in American politics had been left intact. “That was saddening, but the election of Donald Trump was stunningly scary, and it was justified to be scared. How could they elect such a person – who talked that way about women, who was so crude and … to me, creepy.”
She saw him as unfit for the White House. Now she would emerge as his most persistent Democratic foil on Capitol Hill and across the country. By midnight Tuesday, Nancy Pelosi knew that she wasn’t going anywhere. The election she thought would be the end of her career became instead the beginning of its most consequential chapter.
Early Wednesday morning, when the six-year-old daughter of Nadeam Elshami, Pelosi’s chief of staff, woke up, she asked her father expectantly, “Did the girl win?”
“No,” he told her.
She burst into tears.
Elshami relayed his daughter’s reaction to Hillary Clinton’s defeat when Pelosi’s staff gathered later that morning. That was how a lot of them felt, he said. “Everybody can cry,” he said. “You can let it out now.” But get over it fast, he went on, because they needed to get back to work. “Look, this is where we are. We have a new president. We have a job to do. The leader has a job to do.”
Pelosi reached out to Hillary Clinton the day after the election. “It was a somber and sad conversation,” Clinton told me, “because it wasn’t what either of us expected.”
She also reached out to the president-elect. Pelosi called him at Trump Tower in New York; he was the one who picked up the phone at the other end. He was clearly surprised. How did she get the number? he asked. She thanked him for taking the call and offered her congratulations. She told him she looked forward to working with him, especially where they shared common ground, including the idea of a major federal investment in infrastructure projects.
“Nancy, me too,” he replied. “We’ll get some good things done.” The president-elect praised her as someone who could deliver, “better than anybody.” When Pelosi suggested that the president-elect schedule a session soon with the bipartisan Congressional Caucus for Women’s Issues, Trump replied, “Talk to my daughter about it,” then passed the phone to Ivanka Trump. Now it was Pelosi’s turn to be surprised. The House Democratic leader found herself listening to Trump’s thirty-five-year-old daughter, whose résumé mostly involved working on enterprises named Trump, relay her thoughts on childcare policy.
“Don’t forget, I was a supporter of yours,” Trump said at the end of their conversation, a reference to a contribution she had once gotten from him for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, before he was a Republican. “I think you’re terrific.”
For a time, Pelosi would be just about Trump’s only regular opponent who didn’t become the target of a derisive nickname on his Twitter feed. Even two weeks before the midterm elections in 2018, Trump told me that having Pelosi as Speaker of the House wouldn’t be so bad. In some ways, he mused, he might even be better off.
Aboard Air Force One, my USA TODAY colleague David Jackson and I interviewed the president while he was on his way to headline a huge rally in Houston on behalf of Texas senator Ted Cruz, the 2016 rival he had once labeled “Lyin’ Ted.” Sitting at the broad desk in his office on the presidential plane, Trump was remarkably sanguine about the possibility that Republicans might lose control of the House. “I’ll be honest with you, if the Democrats get in, I think I’ll be able to work with them,” he said. “They need me. They don’t want to sit there and for two years do nothing. They want to get things passed.”
But his view of her would change, and radically. Pelosi would become the unyielding counterpart to Trump, consistently able to get under his skin. She had the power to stand up to him and the aplomb to stare him down, the singular figure who would decide whether and when he would be impeached. The photographs of her in action would become iconic: Striding out of the West Wing in a brick-red coat after she had rebutted the president in their first Oval Office meeting in the wake of the 2018 midterm elections, when Democrats won back the House. Delivering an exaggerated, sardonic clap at his State of the Union address two months later. Standing up at the table in the Cabinet Room that fall, jabbing her finger at him before she led a Democratic walkout from a meeting where he had derided her as “a third-rate politician.” Tearing up the text of the 2020 State of the Union he had just delivered as he stood with his back to her, basking in applause from the Republican side of the chamber.
Even after former vice president Joe Biden became the party’s presumptive presidential nominee in 2020, Nancy Pelosi would continue to be the most prevalent face of the Democratic Party during a perilous time. While the COVID-19 pandemic forced Biden to conduct a virtual campaign for months from his home in Delaware, Pelosi was on Capitol Hill week after week negotiating trillions of dollars in relief aid and stimulus spending. She became a ubiquitous presence on cable TV, arguing the Democrats’ case, negotiating with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, doing her best to ignore or dismiss the president’s tweets. Holding the Democratic Party together.
Nancy Pelosi is a tough interview. She is disciplined and precise. She is unapologetic about repeating the same talking points. She isn’t inclined to indulge in speculation, to discuss the what-ifs. She is rarely willing to dish.
In our third interview for this book, I ventured gingerly to ask if she would give me permission to see her high school and college transcripts. I already had interviewed classmates at the Institute of Notre Dame in Baltimore and at Trinity Washington University, and I had spent time on both campuses. At her alma maters, officials expressed pride in their most famous alumna, and they assured me that she had been a perfect student in every way. But because of federal rules and their own policies, they wouldn’t let me see her records without her approval.
When I made the same request of former First Lady Barbara Bush while I had been working on a biography of her, she sent a bemused note to the authorities at the College of Charleston, which had charge of the archives from her former boarding school. “Although I fear she will be unimpressed,” she wrote, “I am giving my permission for Susan Page to have access to my academic records at Ashley Hall.”
That was not Pelosi’s reaction. She looked appalled, as though I had asked to rifle through her closet. She did give me the courtesy of an explanation for turning me down flat.
“I’m a very private person,” she told me. That is not the typical attitude of elected officials; some of them pursue political careers precisely because they revel in the spotlight. “That’s the thing, when people talk about me in public, I’m like – if I go someplace and I don’t have to speak, I’m in my glory. I’m not looking for an audience. I’m as private a person as there is, and a shy one. I’ve had to be in this role – but I don’t intend to go into personal, personal aspects.” In case I had somehow missed the point, she added firmly: “No.”
That said, as I researched and wrote this biography, she did occasionally go into “personal, personal aspects,” although not always intentionally. I am grateful that she agreed to a series of interviews for the book. (I wasn’t sure she would invite me back after the first interview, when I took a bite into the Dove ice cream bar she had offered and sent tiny shards of the dark chocolate shell flying onto her pristine cream- colored carpet.)
The second interview, sans treats, was on the summer afternoon in July 2019 when her dispute with the Squad had exploded; her anger at the four new progressive congresswomen was palpable. The fourth interview fell on the autumn day in November that Trump’s impeachment hearings began in the House. Then, she was almost preternaturally calm. I interviewed her the following spring during the coronavirus pandemic that had all but closed the Capitol, on the day after the House passed a historic $484 billion relief package, and again in the summer.
Nancy D’Alesandro, the mother of Nancy Pelosi, filed for several patents for the “Vaporizer,” a device that gives steam facials. Found on eBay in 2019, it was still operational. Nancy D’Alesandro, the mother of Nancy Pelosi, filed for several patents for the “Vaporizer,” a device that gives steam facials. Found on eBay in 2019, it was still operational. Nancy D’Alesandro, the mother of Nancy Pelosi, filed for several patents for the “Vaporizer,” a device that gives steam facials. Found on eBay in 2019, it was still operational. UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE; JACK GRUBER, USA TODAY
Occasionally, I would bring artifacts that my research had uncovered, some of them new to her. There were the precise drawings her mother had submitted to the U.S. Patent Office for a device she had invented in the 1940s to give steam facials. Handwritten memos dictated by Pennsylvania congressman John Murtha, the crusty Marine veteran who had run her first campaign for the leadership. Discovered in a file in his archives at the University of Pittsburgh, the notes were preparation for a memoir he never got around to writing before he died.
“Some of the old guys were very hesitant to have a woman as Speaker,” Murtha had said, dictating to an aide who wrote in red ink across a white legal pad. Elected eighteen times to represent Pennsylvania’s 12th Congressional District, Murtha had been a crucial voice in reassuring “the old guys” about her. He listed lessons he had learned from her, about playing the long game and sharing the credit. “Good a political mind as I have ever seen,” he said.
While she is a devout Catholic, Nancy Pelosi is not generally given to the mystical. Still, she relayed one hard-to-explain moment at her first meeting with a president at the White House as a member of the congressional leadership. She had just won election as Democratic whip in 2001, making her the highest-ranking woman in the 213-year history of Congress.
She suddenly realized that never before in the nation’s history had a woman attended one of these sessions. As President George W. Bush began to speak, “I suddenly felt crowded in my chair,” Pelosi recalled. “It was truly an astonishing experience, as if Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott, Alice Paul, and all the other suffragettes and activists who had worked hard to advance women in government and in life were right there with me. I was enthralled by their presence, and then I could clearly hear them say: ‘At last we have a seat at the table.’ After a moment, they were gone.”
Outgoing House Whip David Bonior, D-Mich., presents newly elected Whip Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., with a whip Wednesday Oct. 10, 2001, in Washington. Pelosi defeated Rep…. Outgoing House Whip David Bonior, D-Mich., presents newly elected Whip Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., with a whip Wednesday Oct. 10, 2001, in Washington. Pelosi defeated Rep. Stenny Hoyer, D-Md., for the whip post in the House of Representatives.JOE MARQUETTE, Associated Press
A year later, when Representative Dick Gephardt of Missouri resigned as Democratic leader after disappointing midterm elections, Pelosi broke a new barrier, becoming the first woman to lead a party in either house of Congress. In 2007, she made the biggest break in what she called the “marble ceiling,” a reference to Congress’s stately chambers. Democrats had won the House majority and she was elected Speaker, second to the vice president in the line of succession to the presidency. No woman in American history had ever held such a high office.
One of those applauding her rise was Madeleine Albright, the woman who had previously held that distinction. As secretary of state in the Clinton administration, she had been fourth in line. “When I was named secretary of state, I was always introduced as the highest-ranking woman in the American government, in American history at that time,” Albright told me. “And I was very glad to give that title up to her.”
When President George W. Bush arrived in the House chamber to deliver the State of the Union address, on January 23, 2007, she introduced him with the traditional words of welcome for the annual speech. “Members of Congress, I have the high privilege and distinct honor of presenting to you the president of the United States,” Pelosi said.
When the applause subsided, Bush replied, “And tonight, I have a high privilege and distinct honor of my own – as the first president to begin the State of the Union message with these words: Madam Speaker.”
Bush mentioned Pelosi’s father, elected five times to Congress and present for State of the Union addresses himself in the 1930s and 1940s. In 1987, at age eighty-three and ailing, he summoned the strength to return to the House floor one last time to watch his daughter’s first swearing-in. From his wheelchair, he didn’t miss the opportunity to lobby House Speaker Jim Wright to give her a prized spot on the Appropriations Committee, a panel on which he had served. He would die two months later.
Her gender was groundbreaking. Her legislative achievements would be as well. In 2008, during a financial meltdown that threatened to ignite another Great Depression, Pelosi pushed through an unpopular Wall Street bailout – rescuing Bush, a Republican president, and the nation’s economy – even though the GOP didn’t deliver the votes promised from its side of the aisle. Two years later, with Democrat Barack Obama in the White House, she muscled through the Affordable Care Act after almost everyone else doubted it could be done.
Yet Nancy Pelosi was regularly demonized and routinely underestimated.
Sexism was part of it, the sort of reflexive brush-off faced by many women breaking into more powerful roles in business and the military, in arts and academia. There had never been another politician at her level who wore Armani suits and four-inch Manolos.
Some of it also reflected her own particular combination of strengths and weaknesses. She was a master of the inside game of politics. “One of the very best inside political players that I’ve ever seen,” Hillary Clinton told me. But even after decades in office, Nancy Pelosi wasn’t particularly skilled at the outside game. She was never a compelling orator. “A rhetorical clunkiness – heavy on the alliteration – that makes her sound now and then like a compendium of bumper stickers,” a friendly commentator observed. In a television age, she wasn’t as comfortable as former Speaker Newt Gingrich in the back-and-forth combat of the Sunday morning shows. She didn’t project the reassuring, old-shoe mien of former Speaker Tip O’Neill.
Andrew Harnik, AP
Nancy Pelosi typically came across as determined, focused, even fierce – all qualities that helped her rise in a man’s world. Only occasionally would she display flashes of the warmth and humor that her friends described. She was so disciplined that she could seem robotic. She had to work to slow down her breathless staccato. She would sometimes stumble over words, prompting detractors to falsely accuse her of being drunk, although in fact she rarely had a drink beyond a sip of champagne on celebratory occasions. (That included the time Janet Yellen rather than Larry Summers was named to chair the Federal Reserve.) Republicans caricatured her as a loony left-winger, a “San Francisco liberal.”
Unknown to most, she had been seriously contemplating retirement in 2016 when the unexpected election of Trump changed her mind. Now, whatever her shortcomings, she seemed to be precisely the right person at the right time. Tim Ryan, the Ohio congressman who challenged her for the Democratic leadership in 2016, acknowledged that to me in 2020. “Her political instincts – nobody I ever worked with had any better instincts,” he told me. She eventually would command the solid backing of Democrats. Even those who had questioned her leadership in the past came to view her as indispensable in the era of Trump.
President Trump rattled her publicly only once – during a State of the Union address that included the presentation of the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Rush Limbaugh – but Pelosi regularly rattled him. When he stomped out of a White House meeting after a confrontation over funding a wall along the Mexican border, she was dismissive.
“It’s a temper tantrum by the president,” she said.
Here’s how she described her job: “Every day I’m like, ‘Don a suit of armor, put on your brass knuckles, eat nails for breakfast, and go out there and stop them from taking children out of the arms of their parents, food out of the mouths of babies.” She didn’t see all that as particularly remarkable. “I mean, it’s just the way it is.”
Her attitude of politics-as-war fueled the capital’s hyperpartisanship. The Republican Speaker who succeeded her, John Boehner, told me that she didn’t moderate her rhetoric even when he tried to do so. President George W. Bush privately complained to aides that she was unwilling to respond to his outstretched hand. Even Democrat Barack Obama told a senior White House aide that he felt at times as though she was hectoring him. Pelosi only had one gear – full steam ahead – even when the occasion might have welcomed a lighter touch.
That said, it was a trait her allies came to appreciate.
“The one thing that I understood about Nancy fairly quickly was the fact that she was as tough or tougher than anybody in the world,” Obama told me, declaring himself “a booster” of Pelosi. “There are times that I think we underestimate just that kind of being able to grind and grit it out, and she has that kind of capacity.” He called her “as effective as any legislative leader I’ve seen in managing a diverse and often contentious group of folks with a lot of different points of view.”
Boehner told me she was “one of the top leaders that I’ve worked with over my career, no question.” But he added that her unyielding liberal ideology opened the door for the GOP to win back control and make him her successor as Speaker in 2011.
The long and unexpected course of Pelosi’s life prepared her to face down a disruptive president during a critical time. The youngest child and only daughter in a family with five brothers, she had figured out from an early age how to assert herself in a male-dominated world. She had been trained in politics by her larger-than-life father, the mayor known to all in Baltimore as Tommy the Elder. She had learned about the art of granting favors and organizing the grass roots from her ambitious, restless mother, known as Big Nancy. She had risen in the Democratic Party as a formidable fund-raiser from the opposite coast, where the Democratic base was shifting. She had confronted a string of presidents on a variety of issues.
From her first meeting in the White House with Trump, just three days after his inauguration, she would be the figure in the room willing and able to push back at his provocative declarations, the ones she saw as at odds with reality and, eventually, as dangerous to democracy. It was her ability to stand up to President Donald Trump that finally meant Nancy D’Alesandro Pelosi would be underestimated no more.
President Joe Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland on Thursday announced several executive actions the White House is taking to confront gun violence in America, a problem the president called a “public health crisis.”
The president directed the Department of Justice to recommend legislative changes that would modernize the nation’s current gun laws and give lawmakers and communities tools to combat the “epidemic” of American gun violence.
Biden also announced his nomination for a new permanent director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives — the federal agency that would shoulder many policy initiatives Biden discussed.
“Nothing I’m about to recommend in any way impinges on the Second Amendment or phony arguments suggesting that these are Second Amendment rights at stake in what we’re talking about,” Biden said at the beginning of his address in the White House Rose Garden Thursday. “But no amendment, no amendment, to the Constitution is absolute.”
Here’s what the president and the attorney general announced Thursday.
‘Ghost guns’ regulation gap
Biden said the first step is to better regulate “ghost guns” — or firearms usually assembled from parts, often without serial numbers, The Associated Press reported — which he said can’t be traced from crime scenes and don’t require background checks.
“I want to see these kits treated as firearms under the gun control law, which is going to require that the seller and manufacturers make the key parts with serial numbers and run background checks on the buyers,” Biden said of kits used to make “ghost guns.”
Garland said within 30 days, the ATF “will issue a proposed rule to plug that gap and to enable law enforcement to trace crime guns and they keep guns from being sold to those who cannot lawfully possess them.”
New gun trafficking report
Biden asked the Justice Departed to issue a “new, annual report” that he said “will better help policymakers address firearms trafficking as it is today.” The report would modernize a decades-old report that had been issued by the ATF.
The president called the report an “important tool … to stop firearms from being illegally diverted into dangerous hands.”
Garland said it has been more than 20 years since the “ATF undertook a gun trafficking study” and that “no such study has been conducted since that time.”
“Accordingly, I have directed ATF to begin work on an updated study of criminal gun trafficking. One that will take into account the fact that modern guns are not simply cast or forged anymore, but can also be made of plastic, printed on a 3D printer or sold in self-assembly kits,” Garland said.
“We expect that the lessons from this study will help agents, prosecutors and policymakers tackle modern criminal gun trafficking enterprises,” the attorney general added.
Pistols with stabilizing braces
The attorney general also announced the ATF will propose a new rule clarifying “when a device marketed as a stabilizing device, effectively turns a pistol into a short-barreled rifle.”
“We want to treat pistols modified with stabilizing braces with the seriousness they deserve,” Biden said of the ATF’s forthcoming proposal, which would make stabilized pistols — some which function nearly like an assault rifle — “subject to the National Firearms Act.”
“The National Firearms Act requires that a potential owner paid (a) $200 fee and submit their name and other identifying information to the Justice Department, just as they would if they went out and purchased a silencer for a gun,” Bided added.
‘Red flag law’ model for states
In 60 days, the administration will also publish a model law that states can use to make it easier to adopt “extreme risk protection order laws” — or more commonly known as “red flag laws.”
“These laws allow police or family members to petition a court in their jurisdiction, and say, ‘I want you to temporarily remove from the following people, any firearm they may possess because they’re a danger, in a crisis,’” Biden said, explaining red flag laws.
“Within 60 days, the Justice Department will publish model legislation that will make it easier for states that want to craft laws permitting such emergency risk orders to do so,” said Garland.
Community Violence Interventions program
Garland said the Biden administration will “empower our communities to combat and prevent gun violence” and that the Justice Department is going to make “$1 billion in funding” available “through over a dozen grant programs that can be used to support evidence-based intervention strategies for reducing gun violence.”
Garland said the grant strategies include, but are not limited to, “violence interrupters and hospital-based violence intervention services.”
Biden said gun violence costs the country $280 billion annually from “hospital bills, physical therapy, trauma counseling, legal fees, prison costs and the loss of productivity.”
ATF director nomination
Biden also formally nominated David Chipman — a former ATF special agent and gun control advocate — to be the permanent director of the bureau, The Washington Post reported. Chipman will need Senate confirmation before coming ATF’s new director, according to the Post.
During his 25-year career with ATF, Chipman investigated the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, served on the ATF’s special tactics team and was promoted to lead the the bureau’s Firearms Program, the Post reported.
Chipman is currently a senior policy adviser for Giffords — a gun control nonprofit organization led by former congresswoman Gabby Giffords, who was shot in head during a mass shooting in 2011.
“Vice President (Kamala) Harris and I believe he’s the right person at this moment for this important agency,” the president said of Chipman.
The president also called on Congress to enact a pair of gun control bills that have already passed the U.S. House of Representatives. The two bills, which would increase background checks on firearms purchases, could struggle to find traction in the evenly divided Senate.
Washington — President Biden unveiled his first attempts to curb gun violence on Thursday, announcing a set of modest moves designed to begin revamping federal gun policy by tweaking the government’s definition of a firearm and more aggressively responding to urban gun violence.
“Gun violence in this country is an epidemic, and it’s an international embarrassment,” Mr. Biden said in his remarks announcing the actions. He called high rates of gun violence a “blemish on the character of our nation.”
He pushed back against arguments that these executive actions would infringe upon the right to bear arms. The changes include reviewing federal policy surrounding ghost guns — handmade or self-assembled firearms that don’t include serial numbers — and the use of stabilizing braces on pistols, a modification that turns the weapon into a short-barreled rifle.
“Nothing I’m about to recommend in any way impinges upon the Second Amendment,” the president said. Mr. Biden said he wants ghost gun kits “treated as firearms,” and have key parts labeled with serial numbers. He also said that he wants pistols modified to be more dangerous to be subject to the National Firearms Act, meaning that owners would have to register and pay a fee for the modifications.
The president urged the Senate to pass bills passed in the House to expand background checks. He also called on Congress to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, which would close the so-called “boyfriend loophole” to prevent dating partners and stalkers convicted of domestic violence or abuse from purchasing and owning firearms.
“Whether Congress acts or not, I’m going to use all of the resources at my disposal as president of the United States to protect Americans from gun violence,” Mr. Biden said.
The president also called on Congress to pass an assault weapons ban. He helped shepherd a ban through Congress as a senator in 1994, but it expired in 2004. However, the measures mentioned by the president are opposed by most Republicans, meaning that they are unlikely to pass in the Senate. Most legislation requires 60 votes to advance in the Senate, and Democrats have a 50-seat majority.
But Mr. Biden insists that there is “common ground” between Republicans and Democrats and noted that gun control measures are overwhelmingly popular with the American people.
“I know it’s painful and frustrating that we haven’t made progress that we’ve hoped for,” Mr. Biden said. “No matter how long it takes, we’re going to get these passed. We’re not going to give up.”
Mr. Biden on Thursday also nominated David Chipman, a former special agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), to lead the agency. A widely quoted expert on gun violence, Chipman in recent years has served as policy director for Giffords, the gun control organization founded by former Representative Gabrielle Giffords, who was wounded in a 2011 assassination attempt.
If confirmed, Chipman would be the first permanent director of the agency in more than six years. Given the fraught nature of gun politics, only one ATF director has been confirmed by the U.S. Senate in the last 15 years, leaving the agency mostly run by a string of acting bosses.
The president formally announced the pick on Thursday as he unveiled other steps he’s taking through executive action to address gun violence. He was joined by Attorney General Merrick Garland, whose Justice Department will be tasked with taking some of its most aggressive steps on gun policy in more than a decade.
Advocates for gun control are pushing the president to classify ghost guns as traditional firearms, a move that would require anyone who buys them to undergo a federal background check. On Thursday, Mr. Biden gave the Justice Department 30 days to issue potential changes in federal rules “to help stop the proliferation” of the weapons, according to the White House.
Given the handmade nature of the weapons, ghost guns often cannot be traced by law enforcement because serial numbers are not required.
The Justice Department is also being given 60 days to issue a proposed rule regarding stabilizing braces. Attaching such a brace to a pistol makes the firearm more stable and in essence transforms it into a short-barreled rifle subject to regulation by federal law. The White House noted that the alleged shooter in the March supermarket shooting in Boulder, Colorado, appears to have used a pistol with a brace.
The Justice Department was also asked to draft model legislation to enact “red flag” laws at the state level. For years, lawmakers in both parties have been pushing for federal and state legislation that would temporarily bar people facing mental anguish or other personal crises from accessing firearms if law enforcement or a judge determine they present a danger to themselves or others.
“I am under no illusions about how hard it is to solve the problems of gun violence, and I know the Justice Department alone cannot solve the problem,” Garland said in brief remarks. “But there is work for the department to do, and we intend to do it.”
To curb the uptick in homicides nationwide, the Biden administration is also asking five federal agencies to adapt more than two dozen government programs to help buoy community violence intervention programs nationwide. The White House noted that the president’s American Jobs Plan proposes spending $5 billion over eight years to support state and city-based violence intervention programs.
The new plans earned swift support from national gun control organizations Wednesday night.
John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety, said in a statement that the moves “will start to address the epidemic of gun violence that has raged throughout the pandemic, and begin to make good on President Biden’s promise to be the strongest gun safety president in history.” He added later that the decision to target ghost guns and “treat them like the deadly weapons they are will undoubtedly save countless lives – as will the critical funding provided to groups that focus on city gun violence.”
Kris Brown, president of the gun control advocacy organization Brady, said in a statement that Mr. Biden’s actions “will have immediate impact.”
“President Biden’s actions are historic and they will have an immediate impact. These are tangible and powerful policies that will save lives,” Brown said.
Organizations pushing for stricter gun laws and Democratic lawmakers have been pushing for years for the federal government to reclassify ghost guns and force purchasers to undergo background checks.
“Ghost guns are guns, too. And it’s time to close the loophole,” Democratic Congressman Adriano Espaillat, who’s pushed for legislation to regulate ghost guns, tweeted Wednesday.
The NRA, meanwhile, immediately pushed back on the plans. The organization tweeted Wednesday night that the actions were “extreme” and wrote “the NRA is ready to fight.”
“These actions could require law-abiding citizens to surrender lawful property, and push states to expand gun confiscation orders,” the NRA tweeted.
Meanwhile, Republican Senator Pat Toomey, who co-sponsored background check legislation that failed to pass in Congress in 2013, said in a statement that he and his staff are “reviewing” Mr. Biden’s actions.
“I appreciate President Biden’s expressed willingness to work with both Republicans and Democrats to achieve this goal. If done in a manner that respects the rights of law-abiding citizens, I believe there is an opportunity to strengthen our background check system so that we are better able to keep guns away from those who have no legal right to them,” Toomey said.
It is unclear, however, how much progress gun control reforms can happen in Congress.
“It will take time. This will not be easy. But we have to take action,” White House deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told CBSN Thursday after the president spoke. “And in Congress, there are two pieces of legislation that went out of, that passed the House, bipartisan. In a bipartisan way. And so now it’s time to move those as well and to get that into the Senate, and for the Senate to move those piece of legislation. And the president is going to work very hard as he has committed, as he has said, to make sure that happens.”
Growing in popularity but difficult to track broadly given the lack of a serial number, ghost guns have been used in multiple shooting-related crimes in recent years.
The Biden administration has been reluctant to publicly discuss gun control amid its initial focus on the COVID-19 pandemic and related economic downturn. During his first formal news conference last month, the president signaled he would not be rushed to address the issue despite recent mass shootings in Georgia and Colorado and that his administration would remain focused primarily on pushing legislative responses to the pandemic and his multi-trillion dollar infrastructure plan.
His decision has allowed critics to highlight how Mr. Biden came up short on fulfilling a notable campaign pledge. Appearing in Nevada in February 2020, Mr. Biden vowed to send legislation to Congress on his first day in office that would repeal the liability protection for gun manufactures and closing loopholes in the federal gun background check system.
For weeks, administration aides have said plans were still in the works — a posture that didn’t change in the wake of those recent shootings in Atlanta and Boulder, Colorado.
Corey Rangel, Nancy Cordes, Kristin Brown and Fin Gomez contributed to this report.
Former police officer Derek Chauvin’s lawyers took the wrong approach when cross-examining the prosecution’s expert witness, Civil Rights attorney David Henderson said Thursday.
“They did not do any damage,” Henderson told CNBC’s “The News with Shepard Smith.” “You don’t try to arm wrestle with a gorilla. This doctor is very clearly qualified, he knows more than you do about medical stuff.”
Dr. Martin Tobin, the prosecution’s expert medical witness, is a renowned pulmonary specialist who works in critical care. He concluded that “Floyd died from a low level of oxygen.” Tobin’s testimony came on the ninth day of Chauvin’s murder trial.
Chauvin’s defense attorney, Eric Nelson, suggested Tobin’s report captured only a small portion of what happened during George Floyd’s arrest last May.
Henderson explained that instead of focusing of the medical details, the Chauvin defense team failed to seize an “in” that Tobin gave them during testimony.
The Chicago-based physician said there were four key factors that contributed to Floyd’s asphyxia. He said Floyd was “turned prone on the street, that he has the handcuffs in place combined with the street, that he has a knee on his neck, and he has a knee on his back and on his side.”
Henderson added that Chauvin’s knee on Floyd’s neck was only one of those factors.
“There are three other factors, given that Derek Chauvin’s knee has to be the substantial contributing factor, that’s what you should have cross-examined on,” Henderson said. “There are three other ways that might have caused George Floyd’s death that aren’t directly attributable to [Chauvin].”
Henderson, a former prosecutor and CNBC contributor, also said Tobin effectively “squashed” the defense’s contention that drugs — especially fentanyl — could have caused George Floyd’s death.
Chauvin’s defense team did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.
BRYAN, Texas (KBTX) – Bryan police have identified the suspect in custody for the mass shooting that took place at Kent Moore Cabinets in Bryan.
The suspect was identified as Larry Bollin, 27, of Grimes County.
Police confirm one person was killed and five others were shot Thursday afternoon at Kent Moore Cabinets in Bryan. A Texas Department of Public Safety trooper was also shot in Grimes County in connection to the Bryan business shooting. Police and DPS officials say Bollin was taken into custody in Bedias, but could not rule out whether another suspect was involved.
At a 6 p.m. press conference Bryan Police Chief Eric Buske said they do not have a motive for the suspect in the shooting.
The DPS trooper who was shot in Grimes County while pursuing the suspect was taken by medical helicopter to St. Joseph Health Regional Hospital in Bryan. The trooper was in surgery according to Buske. At last update, the trooper was in serious but stable condition.
Buske said police were called to the cabinet manufacturer at 2:30 p.m. Thursday. Officers arrived on scene at 2:36 p.m., at which point the suspect had left the business.
One person died at the scene and four were transported to St. Joseph Health Regional Hospital in Bryan in critical condition, according to Buske. The police chief said that one additional person is in non-critical condition. A seventh person was transported for an asthma attack.
St. Joseph Health says one patient is in stable condition at St. Joseph Health- College Station and four are at a St. Joseph Health Regional hospital in Bryan. Two patients at the Bryan hospital are currently in critical condition and two are currently stable.
Buske said the suspect is an employee of Kent Moore Cabinets and used a handgun in the shooting. Witnesses have described to KBTX that the shootings appeared targeted. Police said no motive was apparent at this time.
The business did not go on lockdown once police arrived on the scene because the suspect had fled the area, according to Buske. Employees at the scene were interviewed and have since been released.
Buske did not rule out the possibility of additional suspects and said police are working on a phone line where the families of Kent Moore employees can get updates. Most employees have been allowed to leave the facility.
When asked about the city being added to the growing list of cities experiencing mass shootings in 2021, Buske said is unprecedented in Bryan.
“This if the first incident like this in the city that I’m aware of,” said Buske.
He noted that addressing mental illness in the community is vital to curbing more mass shootings like this from happening.
There is still an active police situation off FM 2818 at Stone City Drive as law enforcement responds to the scene. Bryan, College Station, and Texas A&M police responded to the scene, along with the Brazos County Sheriff’s Office, Brazos County constables, and the Texas Department of Public Safety. Federal agencies also provided manpower and support at the scene.
A statement from Kent Moore Cabinets is below:
We are devastated by the events today at our Bryan manufacturing facility located on Stone City Drive. Our hearts go out to the families and the loved ones of those affected. We want to thank the many members of our law enforcement teams and other emergency personnel who responded so quickly. We are fully cooperating with law enforcement during the investigation of this horrible crime. We ask that you respect the privacy of the family members of those who were involved. Right now, our focus is on providing support to and prayers for our employees and the extended Kent Moore Cabinets family during this tragic time.
Jane Long Intermediate School was temporarily under a perimeter seal, but students were released to parents around normal dismissal time. Parents of students who walk home are asked to pick up their children at the school.
Bryan Police Chief Eric Buske held a press conference around 4:40 p.m. Thursday. Watch the full press conference below.
A team coverage update from Live at Five can be found below.
Another staffer for Rep. Matt Gaetz has quit amid a federal investigation into the Florida Republican, The New York Times reported Thursday night.
Devin Murphy, Gaetz’s legislative director, resigned last week, making him the second aide to quit since the investigation was made public. According to The Times, Murphy “told associates that he was interested in writing bills, not working at TMZ.”
Murphy had worked for Gaetz since 2017.
A spokesperson for Gaetz did not immediately return Insider’s request for comment.
News for the departure comes the same day that Gaetz’s press shop released a statement, attributed to “The Women of the Office,” offering support for the beleaguered congressman, who has denied that he engaged in human trafficking, paid for sex using campaign funds, or had a sexual relationship with an underage woman.
Earlier on Thursday, a lawyer for Gaetz’s friend and political ally, Joel Greenberg, announced that his client may be close to reaching a plea deal with the US Department of Justice. Greenberg has been charged with sex trafficking, among other crimes.
“I’m sure Matt Gaetz is not feeling very comfortable today,” the lawyer, Fritz Scheller, told reporters.
Gaetz is reportedly under federal investigation over possible sex trafficking. Gaetz has denied all allegations made against him, saying that he has never paid for sex.
After the worst fire season in California history and as drought conditions raise fears of what’s to come, Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders unveiled a $536-million proposal Thursday to boost efforts at firefighting and a variety of prevention measures, including vegetation management and the construction of fire-resistant structures across the state.
The proposal, which the Legislature could send to the governor’s desk as soon as Monday, marks an early agreement by the governor and lawmakers to spend more than half of the $1 billion in wildfire funding Newsom called for in his state budget proposal in January. The gravity of the issue became clear last week after state officials reported the water content in the Sierra Nevada snowpack stood at 59% of the average for early spring.
“The science is clear: Warming winter temperatures and warming summer temperatures across the American West are creating more challenging and dangerous wildfire conditions,” said Wade Crowfoot, the governor’s secretary of natural resources.
According to an outline provided by legislative staff, more than $350 million will be spent on fire prevention and suppression efforts, including prescribed fires and other projects designed to reduce the vegetation growth that has fueled California’s most devastating fires. The package also includes $25 million for fortifying older homes that weren’t built using fire-resistance methods required during construction over the last decade.
“More suppression strategies, more prevention strategies, more regional, long-term, medium-term strategies,” Newsom said during an event in Fresno County. “And a greater sense of urgency than ever in contemporary California history.”
The agreement between Newsom, Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) and Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood) more than doubles the funds in the governor’s original plan for new fire prevention grants administered by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection — and includes instructions that some of the money be prioritized for “projects that protect a larger population base,” according to bill language introduced Thursday. That provision could ensure a focus on fire threats across Southern California.
Paul Mason, vice president of policy and incentives for the Pacific Forest Trust, said the focus on regionalism is important.
“What we want to do in the forests of Northern California, where fires are driven by fuel, versus the chaparral of Southern California, where fires are driven by wind, are very different,” he said.
The new proposal adds significant muscle to that approach, Mason said.
“This is a huge amount of money,” he said of the $536-million package. “This is at least double what we’ve ever done as a state in the past.”
Lawmakers also significantly boosted funding for the Newsom administration’s plan to construct more fuel breaks across the state, replacing existing vegetation in fire-prone areas to change the speed or path of fire. And they added $36 million for fire resiliency and recovery efforts across conservancies from the Santa Monica Mountains to the San Diego River.
“For every dollar we spend on wildfire prevention, our state saves $6 to $7 in damage,” Atkins said in a written statement. “But it’s not just about saving money — this is about saving Californians’ lives, their homes, and their livelihoods.”
Newsom toured a fuel break site Thursday near Shaver Lake, a location near where the massive Creek fire scorched almost 380,000 acres beginning last September. On hand were National Guard crews deployed as part of a state fire prevention effort that began in 2019. The governor has also sought to boost the ranks of Cal Fire crews, announcing last month that almost $81 million in emergency funds would be used to hire close to 1,400 additional firefighters.
“It requires hand crews, it requires more personnel, but it requires intentionality, it requires a plan. And we have a plan,” the governor told reporters Thursday.
While the agreement to spend more than half a billion dollars came quickly by Sacramento standards, the state’s fire season is already underway. On Monday, firefighters responded to a brush fire in the Angeles National Forest, the third small blaze in the area since last weekend.
“This actually is an emergency, and we need to treat it as such,” said Michael Wara, director of the climate and energy policy program at Stanford University’s Woods Institute for the Environment. “What we see is a front-loading of spending, which I think is absolutely essential.”
Almost 4 million acres were burned by wildfires in California last year, according to Cal Fire statistics . The year saw five of the six largest blazes in the state’s recorded history, none larger than the lightning-sparked blazes that became known as the August Complex fire — scorching more than 1 million acres in Mendocino, Humboldt, Trinity, Tehama, Glenn, Lake and Colusa counties.
Fire conditions this year could be even worse. Many of California’s largest reservoirs are only half full, and winter snow and rain in Northern California have been below their average level.
Most of the money earmarked in the proposal unveiled Thursday would come from California’s general fund, the state’s main bank account for government programs. Better-than-expected tax collections have already produced a multibillion-dollar windfall. The proposal relies on a smaller amount of money from proceeds of the state’s cap-and-trade program, in which companies pay for greenhouse gas emission credits.
Although a number of lawmakers want more of the climate change funds to be used for fire prevention efforts, the new agreement sidesteps the politically volatile issue and the likelihood that it might slow preparations for this fire season.
Though significant, Wara said Californians should view Thursday’s agreement as a good starting point. But he noted that Newsom’s push for $1 billion by the time this year’s budget negotiations are complete is unlikely to be enough to manage even 1 million acres of threatened lands in the year to come, with at least 10 million acres across California requiring fire prevention treatments.
“This is a good start, but this is only Year One,” he said. “We need sustained funding at this scale and maybe even larger for a decade.”
CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky, seen last week at FEMA mass vaccination site in Boston, said Thursday that the CDC is taking steps to address the impact of racism on public health.
Erin Clark/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Erin Clark/Getty Images
CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky, seen last week at FEMA mass vaccination site in Boston, said Thursday that the CDC is taking steps to address the impact of racism on public health.
Erin Clark/Getty Images
Racism is a scourge in American society. It’s also a serious public health threat, according to the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
In a statement released Thursday, Dr. Rochelle Walensky pointed to the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on communities of color, as seen in case numbers, deaths and social consequence.
“Yet, the disparities seen over the past year were not a result of COVID-19,” Walensky said. “Instead, the pandemic illuminated inequities that have existed for generations and revealed for all of America a known, but often unaddressed, epidemic impacting public health: racism.”
“What we know is this: racism is a serious public health threat that directly affects the well-being of millions of Americans,” she added. “As a result, it affects the health of our entire nation. Racism is not just the discrimination against one group based on the color of their skin or their race or ethnicity, but the structural barriers that impact racial and ethnic groups differently to influence where a person lives, where they work, where their children play, and where they worship and gather in community. These social determinants of health have life-long negative effects on the mental and physical health of individuals in communities of color.”
The result, she says, are stark health disparities that have mounted over generations.
So what does it mean for the agency? Walensky has charged all of the offices and centers under the CDC to develop interventions and measurable health outcomes in the next year, addressing racism in their respective areas. And she’s made clear that is a priority for the entire CDC.
The CDC also launched a new web portal, Racism and Health, that’s designed to be a hub for public and scientific information and discourse on the subject.
The site notes that racism, in both its structural and interpersonal forms, has a negative effect on mental and physical health.
And Walensky isn’t trying to avoid hard conversations.
“The word racism is intentional in this [initiative] for the CDC,” she toldTime magazine. “This is not just about the color of your skin but also about where you live, where you work, where your children play, where you pray, how you get to work, the jobs you have. All of these things feed into people’s health and their opportunities for health.”
The CDC committed to continuing to study how racism affects health, and propose and implement solutions accordingly. It will expand its investments in minority and other disproportionately affected communities to create “durable infrastructure” to address disparities.
“It has to be baked into the cake,” Walensky told Time. “It’s got to be part of what everybody is doing.”
BRYAN, Texas (KBTX) – Police confirm one person was killed and five others were shot Thursday afternoon at Kent Moore Cabinets in Bryan. A Texas Department of Public Safety trooper was also shot in Grimes County in connection to the Bryan business shooting. Police and DPS officials say a suspect is in custody, but could not rule out whether another suspect was involved.
Bryan Police Chief Eric Buske said police were called to the cabinet manufacturer at 2:30 p.m. Thursday. It took a “short time” for officers to respond to the scene, at which point the suspect had left the business, he furthered.
One person died at the scene and four were transported to St. Joseph Health Regional Hospital in Bryan in critical condition, according to Buske. The police chief said that one additional person is in non-critical condition. A seventh person was transported for an asthma attack.
DPS says a trooper was shot in Grimes County while pursuing a suspect in the Bryan business shooting. The trooper, who has not been identified, is in serious but stable condition.
Buske said the suspect is an employee of Kent Moore Cabinets and used a handgun in the shooting, which witnesses have described to KBTX as appearing targeted. Police said no motive was apparent at this time.
Buske did not rule out the possibility of additional suspects and said police are working on a phone line where the families of Kent Moore employees can get updates. Most employees have been allowed to leave the facility.
There is still an active police situation off FM 2818 at Stone City Drive as law enforcement responds to the scene. Bryan, College Station, and Texas A&M police responded to the scene, along with the Brazos County Sheriff’s Office, Brazos County constables, and the Texas Department of Public Safety. Federal agencies also provided manpower and support at the scene.
A statement from Kent Moore Cabinets is below:
We are devastated by the events today at our Bryan manufacturing facility located on Stone City Drive. Our hearts go out to the families and the loved ones of those affected. We want to thank the many members of our law enforcement teams and other emergency personnel who responded so quickly. We are fully cooperating with law enforcement during the investigation of this horrible crime. We ask that you respect the privacy of the family members of those who were involved. Right now, our focus is on providing support to and prayers for our employees and the extended Kent Moore Cabinets family during this tragic time.
Jane Long Intermediate School was temporarily under a perimeter seal, but students were released to parents around normal dismissal time. Parents of students who walk home are asked to pick up their children at the school.
KBTX has multiple reporters on the scene and will update this story as additional information becomes available.
Bryan Police Chief Eric Buske held a press conference around 4:40 p.m. Thursday. Watch the full press conference below.
A team coverage update from Live at Five can be found below.
“Most people don’t know it, you walk into a store and you buy a gun, you have a background check. But you go to a gun show, you can buy whatever you want and no background check,” he said.
Biden’s comment appeared to be a misstatement of what is commonly described by Democrats as the “gun show loophole” around background checks. In reality, federally licensed vendors have to conduct background checks regardless of whether they are selling guns out of a store or at a show.
The “loophole” really applies to private sellers. Individuals are permitted to sell guns to other individuals without conducting background checks, regardless of where the sale takes place. These sales often take place at gun shows, as gun owners can sell there or use the events convenient and secure meeting points for the parties involved.
When asked about this during a press briefing, White House press secretary Jen Psaki responded with Biden’s position, which is that “background checks are something that should be universal.”
Biden’s statement came during an address in which he announced several planned executive actions on gun control. These included requiring serial numbers on kits for homemade “ghost guns” so they can be traced, a required fee and submission of identifying information for purchasers of stabilizing braces for pistols — as is currently required for silencers — and a national red flag law that would allow police or family members to petition a court to temporarily confiscate a person’s guns if they pose a danger to themselves or others.
This is a widget area - If you go to "Appearance" in your WP-Admin you can change the content of this box in "Widgets", or you can remove this box completely under "Theme Options"