Democratic leaders are on track to bring both President Biden’s social spending bill and the bipartisan infrastructure bill up for votes on Friday following weeks of intense negotiations with progressive and moderate holdouts.

The House Rules Committee is slated to meet throughout the night to finalize the text of Biden’s spending bill, dubbed the “Build Back Better Act.” The legislation is expected to outline roughly $1.75 trillion in spending over a 10-year period.

When the bill is finalized, the House will debate and vote on the “rule” for the spending bill and then vote on whether to pass the bill itself. House lawmakers will also vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill, which is focused on physical projects. The House already debated the infrastructure bill, likely fast-tracking a final vote.

PELOSI: PAID LEAVE ADDED BACK INTO BIDEN SPENDING BILL

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., walks with reporters seeking updates about a vote on President Joe Biden’s now-$1.85 trillion domestic policy package as well as a companion $1 trillion infrastructure bill, at the Capitol in Washington, T (AP Newsroom)

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., informed lawmakers of the expected timeline on Thursday night.

“The House will convene at 8:00 a.m. for legislative business tomorrow and will take votes on the Senate Amendment to H.R. 3684 – Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Build Back Better Act,” Hoyer said.

The votes will take place after tense infighting among Democratic lawmakers in the House and Senate. 

FILE PHOTO: U.S. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) leaves the House floor at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., October 12, 2021. REUTERS/James Lawler Duggan/File Photo (Reuters Photos)

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., forced significant cuts to the scope of Biden’s spending bill, which originally called for $3.5 trillion in spending on social and climate-related programs. But earlier this week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced a provision for four weeks of paid leave, which Manchin opposed, would be added back into the bill.

U.S. Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) walks through the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., October 21, 2021. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz (Reuters Photos)

Democratic leaders say “pay-fors” included in the bill, such as tax hikes for the wealthiest Americans and enhanced IRS tax enforcement, will cover the bill’s costs. Republicans have universally opposed the bills, arguing that they are fiscally irresponsible and could lead to economic ruin amid rising inflation.

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

If the House votes pass, the “Build Back Better Act” will proceed for a Senate vote. It is still not clear if Manchin and fellow moderate Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., the two key holdouts, will support the final version of the spending bill.

Source Article from https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/bidens-social-spending-infrastructure-bills-house-votes-friday

Special counsel John Durham’s indictment of Igor Danchenko, the principal source for the bogus Steele dossier used by the FBI as a basis for the Trump-Russia investigation, further illustrates that Durham has his sights set on the Clinton campaign.

Danchenko has been charged with five counts of lying to the FBI in interviews during 2017, as the bureau struggled in futility to verify outlandish allegations that Donald Trump and his campaign were clandestine agents of the Kremlin. Those allegations were compiled in the so-called Steele dossier, which the FBI relied on in obtaining surveillance warrants from a secret federal court.

The dossier was generated by the Clinton campaign. Its principal author was former British spy Christopher Steele. Steele’s main source was Danchenko, a Russian native based in the United States who worked at the Brookings Institution — a Washington think-tank whose former president, Strobe Talbott, is a college friend of Bill Clinton’s who worked in the Clinton State Department.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign generated the Steele dossier.
Richard Shotwell/Invision/AP

At Brookings, Danchenko worked with Fiona Hill, later a member of Trump’s National Security Council (and a key witness in the first Trump impeachment over the unrelated Ukraine controversy). It was through Hill that Danchenko became acquainted with Steele, who ran a London-based intelligence firm upon leaving MI-6, the British spy service.

Durham’s indictment alleges that Danchenko lied about two major points.

John Durham
U.S. Department of Justice via AP, File

First, he fabricated the claim that the president of the Russian-American Chamber of Commerce informed him that, during the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump was involved in a well-developed “conspiracy of cooperation” with the regime of Russian President Vladimir Putin. In reality, the indictment says, this conversation never happened.

The Chamber president is not identified by name in the indictment. After the Steele dossier became public, however, there was intense speculation that the Chamber’s founder, Sergey Millian, was a Steele dossier source. As I recounted in my book on Russiagate, “Ball of Collusion,” Millian denied being a source and trashed the dossier as “fake news created by sick minds.”

Danchenko is also alleged to have concealed that one of his sources for the information he provided to Steele was a longtime Democratic Party operative who was close to the Clintons’ — having worked on both of Bill Clinton’s successful presidential campaigns and Hillary Clinton’s unsuccessful 2008 presidential campaign. This source was revealed on Thursday to be Chuck Dolan, a  public-relations executive who had Russian contacts, and referred to as “PR Executive-1” in the indictment.

The FBI interviewed Danchenko because it was desperately trying to corroborate the Steele dossier claims. One question that Durham must be pressing is: What took the Bureau so long? The Obama Justice Department brought the FBI’s sworn claims to the secret federal foreign intelligence surveillance court in October 2016. Though the FBI is supposed to verify its allegations before going to court, it apparently did not interview Danchenko, the main source for the dossier, until January 2017 — by which time it was obtaining its second 90-day spy warrant.

It appears that Durham theorizes that the Trump-Russia collusion narrative was a political attack manufactured by the Clinton campaign. Relying on Danchenko, Steele compiled the reports for Glenn Simpson, co-founder of an intelligence firm Fusion-GPS, which specializes in digging up political dirt. Fusion-GPS was retained for the Trump project by Perkins-Coie, the Clinton campaign’s law firm.

In September, Durham indicted former Perkins-Coie Michael Sussmann for making a false statement to the FBI while peddling Trump-Russia allegations that the Bureau eventually found unsubstantiated. Durham alleges that Sussmann concealed that he was working for the Clinton campaign and a tech executive who was hoping for an important government job if Clinton was elected.

Durham’s charging instruments suggest that the Clinton campaign used its agents to peddle the Trump-Russia rumors to the government and the media, then used the fact Trump was being investigated as part of its campaign messaging.

Andrew C. McCarthy is the author of “Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency.”

Source Article from https://nypost.com/2021/11/04/arrest-illustrates-how-steele-dossier-was-political-dirty-trick-by-hillary-clinton/

At the heart of the matter in the Georgia case, and many others like it where white people dominate the jury box, is the ability of lawyers to issue a limited number of peremptory challenges — which usually require no explanation — to strike potential jurors from the process. Lawyers typically have wide discretion, but in a landmark 1986 case, Batson v. Kentucky, the Supreme Court ruled that lawyers could not discriminate on the basis of race in issuing the challenges.

Since then, lawyers who suspect the other side of unseating a juror on racial grounds can contest it, a move often called a “Batson challenge.”

That is what unfolded for almost two hours on Wednesday at the Glynn County Courthouse, as defense lawyers walked Judge Walmsley through the detailed reasons they believed that each of the eight Black residents should not be seated, such as the pro-Arbery hashtags that some potential jurors had posted online or the negative opinions they had formed about the three defendants — Gregory McMichael, 65; his son Travis McMichael, 35; and their neighbor William Bryan, 52.

Laura D. Hogue, one of the lawyers for the elder Mr. McMichael, described peremptory strikes as an important tool that allowed lawyers “to weed out the worst of the worst,” by which she meant people who seemed to be irredeemably biased.

The lead prosecutor, Linda Dunikoski, pushed back in every case. She argued that a number of potential jurors were honest with lawyers about their knowledge and opinions about the case, but were then unseated by the defense on the basis of those opinions — even when they stated that they could be impartial if seated.

Ms. Dunikoski also noted that the 12-person jury had been selected from a panel that included 12 Black people and 36 white people — and yet, she said, “the actual jury that was selected has only one African American male on it.” The prosecution used all 12 of its peremptory strikes on white potential jurors.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/04/us/ahmaud-arbery-trial-jury.html

“Are you really saying that the president’s notes, talking points, and telephone conversations on January 6th, for example, have no relation to matters on which Congress is considering legislation?” Chutkan said, such as the integrity of federal elections, domestic security or the security of the Capitol.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/trump-records-hearing-jan-6-committee/2021/11/04/4884a830-3d7f-11ec-bfad-8283439871ec_story.html

New Jersey Republican gubernatorial candidate Jack Ciattarelli is refusing to concede defeat in the election, despite calls from the media declaring incumbent Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy the winner.

“The governor’s victory speech last night was premature,” Ciattarelli said in a video message on Twitter Thursday. “No one should be declaring victory or conceding the election until every legal vote is counted.”

Murphy’s declaration of victory comes as less than one percentage point separates the two candidates in a nail-biter race, a result many analysts did not expect in what is typically a reliably blue state.

Jack Ciattarelli, (Reuters)

CIATTARELLI CAMPAIGN REACTS TO AP DECISION: ‘IRRESPONSIBLE’ TO CALL VOTE THIS EARLY FOR MURPHY

But Ciattarelli argued that “after 2.4 million ballots” were counted, “there are still tens of thousands of vote-by-mail and provisional ballots yet to be counted.”

The process to count the remaining ballots could drag on for weeks, with ballots arriving by Nov. 8 still eligible to be counted. The GOP candidate could also call for a recount, which under New Jersey law he would have to request within 17 days if there is reason to believe that an error has been made in counting the votes of that election.

“I don’t want people falling victim to wild conspiracy theories or online rumors,” Ciattarelli said in the video. “While consideration is paid to any and all credible reports, please don’t believe everything you see or read online.”

This photo from Tuesday, Oct. 12, 2021, shows Gov. Phil Murphy, D-N.J., (AP Photo/Frank Franklin II, Pool)

The Ciattarelli campaign has not indicated whether it would seek a recount in the tight race, instead opting to see how the rest of the voting plays out before deciding on their next course of action.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP 

New Jersey Republican gubernatorial candidate Jack Ciattarelli

Ciattarelli’s refusal to concede comes just one day after his campaign called the media “irresponsible” for calling the race, arguing the state is not sure how many ballots are left to count.

“Phil Murphy and Jack Ciattarelli are separated by a fraction of a percent out of 2.4 million ballots cast. It’s irresponsible of the media to make this call when the New Jersey Secretary of State doesn’t even know how many ballots are left to be counted,” the campaign said.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/politics/jack-caittarelli-refuses-to-concede-nj-gubernatorial-race

Climate activists confronted Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia outside his houseboat early Thursday morning to demand action on a proposed social spending bill currently stalling in Congress.

Manchin has raised concerns about the Build Back Better Act, whose details President Joe Biden outlined last week. The senator said on Monday he doesn’t intend to support the legislation until he knew more about the impact it would have on both the national debt and inflation.

The framework for the bill released at the end of October includes what Biden’s administration described as the “largest effort to combat climate change in American history.”

Senator Joe Manchin was confronted Thursday morning by climate and hunger activists who are calling for his removal as chair of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Above, Manchin arrives for a news conference at the U.S. Capitol on November 1, 2021 in Washington, D.C.
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Protesters with the Sunrise Movement said Thursday they are calling for forward momentum on the bill. They also called upon Biden and leading Democrats in Congress to remove Manchin from his role as chair of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

“We want to live. We want to live,” protesters chanted as they followed Manchin Thursday morning in Washington, D.C. One protester could be overheard saying: “Senator Manchin, why won’t you fight for my future?”

Video provided to Newsweek showed the protesters first following Manchin as he walked toward a parking garage, and later blocking his vehicle from leaving. Some were seen carrying a large sign that read: “Joe Manchin is burning our future for profit.”

The Sunrise Movement, which identifies itself as “a youth movement to stop climate change and create millions of good jobs in the process,” released details about the climate mobilization rally earlier this week. Protesters were to meet east of the Washington Channel at Westminster Presbyterian Church at 6 a.m. local time on Thursday.

More than 100 people participated in the protest, according to a Sunrise Movement press release. The protest followed an earlier hunger strike that participants said lasted two weeks and ended when the decision was made “to eat as fuel for the rage we feel toward Joe Manchin and any Democrat who sides with him.’

Lauren Maunus, the advocacy director of the Sunrise Movement, said in the organization’s press release that it “is egregious and completely unacceptable that Joe Manchin, who has profited millions of dollars from his family’s own fossil fuel firm is in charge of creating consequential climate agenda.”

Maunus’ statement continued by calling for Manchin’s removal from his position on the committee.

A protest participant identified in the Sunrise Movement’s release as Kidus Girma reiterated the group’s calls for progress on the proposed legislation.

“Our lives are worth more than his coal money and we’ll keep fighting until President Biden, Joe Manchin and Democrats pass a climate and jobs package that meets the moment of the climate crisis,” Girma said in the release. “One sad, greedy man, cannot stand in the way of life saving climate legislation. Enough is enough.”

Newsweek reached out to Manchin’s office for comment and will update this article with any response.

Source Article from https://www.newsweek.com/joe-manchin-surrounded-climate-protesters-he-steps-off-houseboat-we-want-live-1645974

The Five” on Thursday discussed Thursday Democratic infighting over how to move forward after the big loss in Virginia in which Republican Glenn Youngkin defeated former Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe in a neck-and-neck election widely seen as a referendum on President Joe Biden’s policies. 

Democrats also had a scare in New Jersey, where the Democratic governor, Phil Murphy, is projected to win by a narrow margin against Republican Jack Ciattarelli. (Murphy had a 20-point lead in the polls at one point before Election Day.)

Democratic moderate Sen. Joe Manchin responded to the election in an interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier, saying it was a “wake up call” for Democrats. On the other hand, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said she believes Democrats should focus on energizing their progressive base. 

MANCHIN CALLS ELECTION RESULTS A ‘WAKE-UP CALL,’ REACTS TO IMPACT ON BIDEN AGENDA

Manchin says this is a wake-up call, but you cannot wake up the woke because … they believe it’s the people like Manchin, the moderates and everybody else on the planet who are unconscious. So you can never actually have a wake-up call with the woke,” Greg Gutfeld said. 

Democratic strategist James Carville echoed this view Wednesday on “PBS NewsHour,” saying that the Democratic Party needs a “woke detox.”

“What went wrong is stupid wokeness … I mean this ‘defund the police’ lunacy, this take Abraham Lincoln’s name off of schools, people see that. And it really has a suppressive effect on all across the country on Democrats. Some of these people need to go to a woke detox center or something,” Carville said. 

Jesse Watters suggested Democrats may want to listen to Carville.

“Carville knows how to read a room,” he said. 

Watters said Carville can see that Americans like the police, the Founders, and that “they don’t want to be called racists because they oppose CRT (critical race theory).” Americans want a lower cost of living, improved infrastructure and less divisiveness, which is not what the woke menu offers, according to the “Watters’ World” host.

FILE PHOTO: Opponents of an academic doctrine known as Critical Race Theory attend a packed Loudoun County School board meeting until the meeting erupted into chaos and two people were detained, in Ashburn, Virginia, U.S. June 22, 2021. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein/File Photo

“Right now, AOC is in this little Queens bubble, the Met Gala bubble, the Washington, D.C., social media bubble,” he said. “She doesn’t have a clue what the rest of the country wants. [Sen.] Manchin knows, Manchin can read the room, so Manchin wants to give us what we want, and AOC is not going to let us have it.”

U.S. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., September 21, 2021. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz

Geraldo Rivera slammed progressives for holding the infrastructure package hostage by demanding the reconciliation bill pass first, calling it an “audacious ploy.”

“And this is the audacious ploy of the progressives who said, ‘You can’t have infrastructure if we can’t have “Build Back Better”‘ – they kept it hostage,” he said. “They kidnapped the bipartisan infrastructure bill that would have given us bridges, tunnels, and WiFi … because they wanted to jam that, and then they lost. Now I think AOC is charming and once in a generation, and you know, but she ain’t happening substantive.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Dana Perino and Judge Jeanine Pirro both agreed the Virginia elections have ramifications for next year’s midterms and beyond. 

“The thing that has happened is – it’s just not an indication of what’s going to happen in 2022 and 2024, possibly,” Pirro said.  She added that Republicans “put … together coalitions of different parties who are interested in the issue of schools, children, America, and working … People are crossing party lines while the Democrats can’t even stay together in lockstep.”

Perino said the Democrats were “in-between a rock and a hard place.” 

“If they ignore the will of the voters that have just spoken, then that will be bad for them. But if they don’t press forward, they will literally have nothing to show their base. Yes, and in a midterm election, you need your base to turn out,” she said.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/media/the-five-joe-machin-infrastructure-reconciliation-virginia-election

WASHINGTON, Nov 4 (Reuters) – The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote on Friday on the social policy and climate-change bill and a bipartisan infrastructure bill that form the centerpiece of President Joe Biden’s legislative agenda, a senior Democratic aide said on Thursday.

Democrats have missed previous self-imposed deadlines to vote on the legislation, but their leadership feels confident they can finish on Friday, the aide said.

Earlier on Thursday night, Biden was calling various House members and urging them to approve the $1.75 trillion reconciliation bill, a White House official said.

Democrats want to pass that bill and the $1 trillion infrastructure measure, which has already been approved by the Senate, by Thanksgiving later this month.

Biden left for Europe last week for a meeting of G20 leaders and a U.N. climate conference without a deal on the legislation. An affirmative vote before the conclusion of the climate conference in Glasgow on Nov. 12 would bolster the credibility of Biden’s pledge to halve U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 levels by 2030.

Democrats are reeling from a disappointing loss in Virginia this week when a Republican won the governor’s office in a state Biden won handily in 2020. The party is eager to show it can move forward on the president’s agenda, and fend off Republicans in the 2022 midterm elections when control of the House and Senate will be on the line.

The nonpartisan U.S. Joint Committee on Taxation issued a report scoring the “Build Back Better” legislation’s tax revenue provisions at $1.48 trillion over the next decade.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal said the committee’s analysis did not account for additional revenue from provisions intended to enhance the Internal Revenue Service’s tax collection and to lower the cost of prescription drugs for the Medicare healthcare program for the elderly.

“It’s an objective view that it is solidly paid for,” Pelosi told reporters after a meeting of House Democrats on the legislation.

Moody’s Analytics analysts said on Thursday the bills would be fully paid for and add jobs, but that implementing them would take “deft governance.”

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen issued a statement saying the legislation would raise more than $2 trillion, enough to pay for the bill and “reduce deficits over the long term.”

The tax committee assesses only the tax provisions in legislation. The Congressional Budget Office, another nonpartisan arm of Congress, is expected to provide revenue scores for the IRS and drug-pricing provisions, Democrats said. But a final CBO report is not expected this week.

If passed by the House, the social policy legislation would move to the Senate, also narrowly controlled by Democrats, where Majority Leader Chuck Schumer wants to enact it before the Nov. 25 Thanksgiving holiday.

The legislation would raise $640 billion from tax increases on high-income individuals and $814 billion from corporate and international tax reforms from 2022 to 2031, the Joint Committee on Taxation said.

Congress faces another pair of critical deadlines in less than a month: Lawmakers set a Dec. 3 deadline to avoid a potentially economically devastating default on the federal government’s debt, as well as to avert a politically embarrassing government shutdown.

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Source Article from https://www.reuters.com/world/us/moderates-balk-175-trln-biden-bill-tax-arbiter-says-revenues-fall-short-2021-11-04/

People opposed to Texas Republicans’ effort to pass new voting restrictions gather at the state capitol in Austin on July 10.

Tamir Kalifa/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Tamir Kalifa/Getty Images

People opposed to Texas Republicans’ effort to pass new voting restrictions gather at the state capitol in Austin on July 10.

Tamir Kalifa/Getty Images

The Biden administration is suing Texas over the state’s restrictive voting law that was signed into law in September and is set to got into effect Dec. 2.

The U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit in a federal court Thursday claiming that the Republican-led law contains several provisions that “will disenfranchise eligible Texas citizens who seek to exercise their right to vote.”

Justice officials say those people include “voters with limited English proficiency, voters with disabilities, elderly voters, members of the military” who are deployed and American citizens who are out of the country.

“These vulnerable voters already confront barriers to the ballot box,” the DOJ says, “and SB 1 will exacerbate the challenges they face in exercising their fundamental right to vote.”

State Attorney General Ken Paxton wrote on Twitter: “[President] Biden is coming after Texas for SB1, our recently enacted election integrity law. It’s a great and a much-needed bill. Ensuring Texas has safe, secure, and transparent elections is a top priority of mine. I will see you in court, Biden!”

In particular, the DOJ raised concerns about provisions of the Texas law that add new rules and restrictions around what kinds of assistance voters with disabilities can receive at the polls.

The Biden administration also is challenging the changes state lawmakers made to mail-in voting. Federal officials claim new identification requirements could disenfranchise eligible voters.

“By requiring rejection of mail ballot materials that do not contain identification numbers that identify the same voter identified on the voter’s application for voter registration,” the lawsuit says, “SB 1 mandates rejection of written materials requisite to voting based on errors or omissions that are not material to determining a voter’s qualification to vote or vote by mail.”

In June, the Biden Justice Department sued Georgia for its new voting law, alleging it targets Black voters.

In their lawsuit against Texas, DOJ officials also raise concerns about the state’s long history of passing laws that discriminate against vulnerable communities, including people with disabilities and people of color.

“The State of Texas’s history of official voting-related discrimination against its disfavored citizens is longstanding and well-documented,” officials wrote. “Federal intervention has been necessary to eliminate numerous devices intentionally used to restrict minority voting in Texas.”

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2021/11/04/1052564177/the-biden-administration-is-suing-texas-over-its-new-voting-law

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., touted the Republican Party’s election victories, calling them a “repudiation” to the Democrats’ policies and a “response to the Biden agenda.” Sen. Thune joined “America’s Newsroom” on Thursday to discuss the victories, calling the response a “clear message” Americans are fed up with left-wing policies. 

LATINO REPUBLICANS FLIP DEMOCRAT SEATS IN VIRGINIA AND TEXAS, SAY VOTERS FRUSTRATED WITH LEFT-WING POLICIES

JOHN THUNE: The clear message coming out of the elections on Tuesday night was that there was a rejection, a repudiation, of this…big government approach that Democrats here in Washington are taking, and I don’t know how you can conclude any other way. I mean, obviously in Virginia, we saw a historic victory and in New Jersey, a very close race. But in both cases, I think it was a response to the Biden agenda and the American people saying, ‘I don’t want this, this isn’t what I voted for.’ And so I think they’re [Dems]… completely misinterpreting that message. I think they have to double down now. I mean, maybe they don’t have any alternative because they’ve gotten themselves so extended out there. 

CLICK HERE FOR THE FULL INTERVIEW: 

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/media/sen-john-thune-calls-gop-election-victories-repudiation-of-democrats-big-government-approach

Hours after Edward Durr seemingly solidified his stunning election victory over state Senate President Steve Sweeney, xenophobic and anti-Muslim social media messages have surfaced that were posted from his accounts.

The posts came to light shortly after the Associated Press projected Durr’s victory over Sweeney on Thursday morning in the 3rd legislative district, putting him on the verge of one of the biggest upsets in New Jersey political history. With 100% of precincts reporting, Durr led Sweeney 32,742 votes to 30,444 — 51.8% to 48.2%.

Durr, 58, did not immediately respond to two phone messages seeking comment.

A post from his Twitter account in September 2019 labeled Islam “a false religion” and its prophet, Muhammad, a “pedophile.”

A pair of tweets from Durr’s account called U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez a “pedophile” in 2017 and 2018. And multiple posts from his Facebook account downplayed the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol — one called it “not an insurrection … (but) an unauthorized entry by undocumented federal employers!”

In September, a post from Durr’s Facebook account compared COVID-19 mandates to Jews being exterminated in the Holocaust.

He also seemingly took shots at Vice President Kamala Harris on his personal Facebook account.

Richard McGrath, the Senate Democratic spokesman, declined to comment about Durr’s posts when reached via email. Sweeney did not immediately return a phone message left Thursday night seeking comment.

Durr, a commercial truck driver for 25 years, challenged Sweeney on a shoe-string budget, claiming to have spent a whopping $153 during the primary portion of his campaign. Durr has never held political office, and most people outside South Jersey had never even heard of him before Tuesday.

Sweeney, meanwhile, is the longest-tenured Senate president in New Jersey history, having held the post since 2010. He was expected to serve a seventh term in the position before launching a possible bid for governor in 2025.

Sweeney has not conceded, saying not all votes have been counted.

“I joked with people and I said, ‘I’m going to shock the world. I’m going to beat this man,’” Durr told NJ Advance Media on Wednesday afternoon. “I was saying it, but really kind of joking. Because what chance did a person like me really stand against this man? He’s literally the second-most powerful person in the state of New Jersey.”

Our journalism needs your support. Please subscribe today to NJ.com.

Matthew Stanmyre may be reached at mstanmyre@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @MattStanmyre. Find NJ.com on Facebook.

Source Article from https://www.nj.com/politics/2021/11/newly-elected-gop-state-senators-social-media-accounts-contain-homophobic-anti-muslim-posts.html

But even as multiple policy disputes remain, House Democratic leaders and progressives now are ready to speed toward passage of a bill that doesn’t have Manchin’s blessing and thus faces an uncertain fate in the Senate.

The fluid nature of the House bill comes as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer publicly presses for the Senate to take up the social spending bill as early as Nov. 15, provided the House can pass it in the next few days. That timeline could slip, however, given the Senate’s other priorities and Manchin’s persistent calls for a strategic pause.

As he left the Capitol on Thursday afternoon for a weeklong recess, Manchin said he doesn’t “control the clock” while Schumer weighs putting the Biden-blessed bill on the floor ASAP. Asked if he would support his leader’s schedule, Manchin got in his car and then shrugged theatrically.

Earlier in the day, Manchin said on MSNBC that Democrats should “slow down” on the social spending bill and “wait and see if inflation is transitory.” Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) also signaled in an interview that her negotiations with Manchin on paid leave are not done: “There’s still an open door.”

Some Senate Democrats are privately worried that talks could drag further once the climate and safety net legislation comes over from the House, which left one caucus member, speaking candidly but anonymously, “very concerned.” Any prolonged Senate discussions on the social spending bill would run up against the chamber’s other deadlines, including the Dec. 3 end date for current government funding, the expiring debt-limit patch and the need to pass the annual defense bill.

“We’re trying to avoid that, obviously,” said Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) of a lengthy back-and-forth with the House. “There should be an alignment so that we don’t have to have a third chapter to this.”

Even liberal senators acknowledge that the House’s bill isn’t the final word. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt), who endorsed House progressives’ decision to keep the Senate’s bipartisan infrastructure plan and social spending legislation linked, said Thursday that the House version of the latter bill was subject to change.

“Each entity has its own role to play,” Sanders said. “Obviously the House will do its job, and we have to do our job.”

Source Article from https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/04/house-megabill-passage-manchin-last-word-519570

The Biden administration’s vaccine mandate for large firms will come into effect on 4 January, with the threat of hefty fines for willful violations.

Under federal rules issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Covid-19 vaccinations or weekly testing will be required for workers at private companies with 100 or more employees.

The move is part of President Joe Biden’s push to drive up vaccination rates, with similar rules for federal workers and contractors coming into effect in the coming weeks.

According to the new rules, the first deadline is 5 December, when employers must provide time off for workers to get vaccinated and ensure those who are yet to get their shots are wearing masks.

Full vaccination is required by 4 January, with fines of up to $13,653 for each serious violation, and as high as $136,532 for any employer who deliberately disregards the mandate.

The new rules will cover up to 84 million Americans and will be enforced by inspections to check for compliance.

Approximately 17 million healthcare workers at facilities participating in Medicare and Medicaid programs will also be covered by similar rules announced by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which also go into effect on 4 January.

Federal contractors were required to get vaccinated by 8 December, but that has now been pushed in line with the 4 January deadline.

“Together, these rules will cover about 100 million Americans – two-thirds of all workers in America,” the president said in a statement released by the White House on Thursday. “As we’ve seen with businesses – large and small – across all sectors of our economy, the overwhelming majority of Americans choose to get vaccinated. There have been no ‘mass firings’ and worker shortages because of vaccination requirements. Despite what some predicted and falsely assert, vaccination requirements have broad public support.”

Mr Biden added: “I’m calling on employers to act. Businesses have more power than ever before to accelerate our path out of this pandemic, save lives, and protect our economic recovery.”

The new vaccine rules will preempt any state or local laws aimed at banning vaccine mandates or other measures to limit the spread of Covid-19, being considered in states such as Texas and Florida.

OSHA has the authority to act quickly in an emergency where it believes workers are in grave danger and new regulations or standards are required to protect them.

“A virus that has killed more than 745,000 Americans, with more than 70,000 new cases per day currently, is clearly a health hazard that poses a grave danger to workers,” an official said. “The new emergency temporary standard is well within OSHA’s authority under the law and consistent with OSHA’s requirements to protect workers from health and safety hazards, including infectious diseases.”

Workers who choose to remain unvaccinated may do so under the rules, but will still be required to wear masks and submit to weekly testing.

That stipulation does not include healthcare workers who will be held to a higher standard for the safety of patients. Penalties for lack of enforcement in the healthcare sector could be monetary but may include termination from the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

Secretary of Labor Marty Walsh and White House Covid-19 Response Coordinator Jeff Zients wrote an op-ed for USA Today highlighting how the new rule will protect workers from the danger posed by Covid-19.

“Covid-19 continues to hold back our workforce and our economy, and it will continue to do so until more Americans are vaccinated,” they write.

“American workers deserve and expect a safe and healthy workplace. This rule covers more than 80 million workers and will have a huge impact, saving thousands of lives and preventing 250,000 workers from hospitalisation over the next six months alone.”

To date, 78.3 per cent of the US population over the age of 12 (those eligible until the age limit lowers to 5 next week) has received at least one dose of a vaccine, and 68 per cent are fully vaccinated.

Source Article from https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/vaccine-mandate-biden-fine-covid-b1951468.html

“Passing transformative legislation is not easy — it’s hard, very hard,” said Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader. “But the long hours we are putting in, the discussions we have had, some of them quite pointed, will be worth it.”

With Republicans unanimously opposed, Democrats are pushing the social policy and climate measure through Congress under a special process known as reconciliation that shields budget-related legislation from a filibuster and allows it to pass on a simple majority. But with slim margins of control, Democrats need the votes of each of their senators and all but a few of their members in the House to pass the bill.

That means that any single Democratic defector — or a small group of them in the House — can effectively torpedo the legislation.

In a letter this week, five Democrats — including Representatives Stephanie Murphy of Florida, Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey and Jared Golden of Maine — urged Ms. Pelosi to grant them at least 72 hours to review the text of the reconciliation bill and wait for a full analysis from congressional scorekeepers confirming that the bill was fully paid for.

“It is better to get this done right than to needlessly rush its consideration only for our constituents to discover the negative impacts of our unintended consequences,” the lawmakers wrote.

The Joint Committee on Taxation released a report on Thursday that estimated that the tax increases in the bill would raise about $1.5 trillion over a decade. But a separate nonpartisan agency, the Congressional Budget Office, has yet to publish a formal analysis of how much the bill would spend or how much revenue would be generated by other proposals, including a plan to lower the cost of prescription drugs and beef up the I.R.S.’s ability to collect unpaid taxes.

Ms. Pelosi and her deputies stressed that much of the legislation has been public, after two months of committee hearings, private talks and drafts. Her office and White House officials circulated separate, preliminary estimates that found that the bill was fully paid for and would help reduce the deficit, a key priority for many moderates.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/04/us/politics/house-democrats-biden.html

According to OSHA’s new requirements, workers are considered fully vaccinated if they’ve received two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccines, or one dose of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. Companies must provide paid-time off for their employees to get vaccinated and sick leave for side effects as needed. And employers are not required to either pay for or provide tests, though some may still be compelled to do so by other laws or agreements with unions.

Companies that fail to comply with the rule may be subject to fines, depending on how frequently they violate it and whether violations are intentional, a White House official said. An OSHA penalty is typically $13,653 for every serious violation.

Over the past month, the Department of Labor received feedback on the rule from trade groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, as well as executives from UPS, the Walt Disney Company, Fidelity Investments and many others. They have voiced concerns about cost, logistics and potential impact on employees.

Requiring vaccines or regular testing “could significantly diminish the labor pool, particularly in some geographic areas and amongst some demographics in which vaccine hesitancy is widespread,” the National Retail Federation wrote to OSHA last month. “NRF members, like employers across the economy, are already struggling to find workers.”

The January deadline allows retailers and logistics companies, both of which are strapped for employees, to get through the holiday shopping season before instituting the requirements. The same deadline applies to federal contractors, who are subject to their own stricter rules, and to health care workers covered by new emergency regulations.

Companies that have already mandated vaccines, including 3M, Procter & Gamble, IBM and the airlines American, Alaska and JetBlue, have not seen a large number of employees quit over the pressure to get inoculated, though a small minority of workers have given up their jobs.

United Airlines, one of the first major air carriers to require shots for its 67,000 U.S. employees, said in September that more than 99 percent of its employees were vaccinated. Tyson Foods, which set a Nov. 1 deadline, said that more than 96 percent of employees were vaccinated, compared with less than 50 percent before it announced its mandate in August.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/04/business/biden-vaccine-mandate-osha.html

The chasm between these two findings offers an insight into one of the biggest and most consequential discussions in politics: the degree to which Republicans are making inroads with Latino voters.

Until Donald Trump won a bigger-than-expected share of the Latino vote nationwide in 2020, the voting habits of a group long seen as a reliable Democratic voting bloc rarely received the kind of scrutiny they are now routinely afforded. And that scrutiny is only going to ratchet up in the 2022 midterm elections, when Latino voters stand to play a key role in some of the nation’s most closely contested races.

“Today, polling in general has a real problem: We’re getting low response rates across the board, and that’s not limited to Hispanic voters, but it’s even harder when you poll smaller groups,” said Eduardo Gamarra, who polls Latino voters in the United States and throughout Latin America.

“The fact is, we probably don’t know who won the Hispanic vote or by how much on Tuesday,” Gamarra, who is also a professor of Latin American studies at Florida International University in Miami, said. “But I can tell you from my research that what we have been seeing is a real message for the Democrats, who are not getting behind issues that really speak to Latinos. It’s a reason we’re seeing the shift.”

In Virginia, none of the exit polls or surveys leading up to election night had a large enough sample of Latinos to be statistically significant — Latinos only account for between 5 and 7 percent of the state’s registered voters. In the other nationally-watched governor’s race, New Jersey, no exit poll was conducted. Nor did pollsters perform Hispanic-heavy surveys leading up to the election in New Jersey, despite the fact that Latinos make up a larger chunk of the electorate than in Virginia — between 10 percent and 14 percent.

Pollsters and political insiders say it will take days to pore over precinct-level data to get a better idea of just how Latino voters broke Tuesday. But in New Jersey, there are a few signs: Some Latino-heavy precincts did show a shift toward Republicans compared to the 2017 gubernatorial contest. Pollsters note there are challenges in both states in getting a full picture, as there are few Latino-majority precincts in Virginia to examine and not all precinct-level data in New Jersey is readily available.

As the largest of the fast-growing demographic groups in the nation, Latinos have become an electoral battleground unto themselves over the past two decades. During Barack Obama’s 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 run, Latinos were solidly blue Democratic voters, second only to African Americans in their loyalty. Last year, Biden won a comfortable majority of Latinos across the country.

Still, Trump unexpectedly made impressive gains with Latino voters, despite a legacy of harsh immigration policies and racist rhetoric.

In Virginia, Trump ran 6 points ahead of his 2016 performance with Latinos — from 30 percent to 36 percent, according to 2020 exit polls. Meanwhile, Biden won 61 percent of the Latino vote, down from Clinton’s 65 percent in 2016.

At first, Democrats cast doubt on the accuracy of the 2020 exit polls and news reports documenting Trump’s gains. But over time, it became clear that his blue-collar culture-war appeals, combined with economic anxiety over Biden’s embrace of Covid-19 restrictions, helped peel off many Latino voters,

Heading into Tuesday night, both sides wondered if 2020 was a one-off due to the pandemic and Trump, or if the trend was real. The dueling exit polls Tuesday night failed to bring more clarity to the situation, and instead fostered more partisan debate.

“The so-called exit poll that Fox News is promoting has a clear Election Day bias and way too large of a Republican sample,” said Matt Barreto, president of BSP Research and long-time Democratic pollster who has published numerous academic articles on exit poll methodology. (Fox News and the Associated Press are partners in the survey, which the AP calls “VoteCast” and Fox calls their “Voter Analysis.”) “The Edison news consortium exit poll appears to have a much more balanced sample of mail voters, early voters and Election Day voters, and that poll suggested Latinos voted Democrat at well over a 2-to-1 margin.”

Other Democratic pollsters were more cautious in their assessment of the party’s performance among Latinos in Tuesday’s election, saying it’s too early for either side to claim victory in Virginia.

“There will be more sophisticated analysis as we actually get the final results, but for right now, nobody knows. Everyone is at this point trying to draw a narrative based on their preexisting views on the state of the country,” said Carlos Odio, co-founder of EquisLabs, a Democratic research firm focused on Latinos.

For Republicans, that meant taking a victory lap based on the AP VoteCast exit poll results and ignoring the inconvenient Edison Research numbers.

“When you examine the actual election results in Virginia, New Jersey and Texas last night, it’s clear that Republicans are continuing to perform well with Hispanic voters,” said Giancarlo Sopo, a GOP media strategist who led the Trump campaign’s national Hispanic advertising last year.

Calling Tuesday’s results a “continuation of 2020,” Sopo pointed to the victory of Republican John Lujan in a special election runoff for an overwhelmingly Latino Texas state House district in the San Antonio area as another indicator of the lasting gains for the GOP.

“Republicans just proved in this election that they could replicate a lot of the success Donald Trump had in certain communities, in the gains that he made with voters of color… and holding on [to] white working class voters,” said Patrick Ruffini, a Republican pollster and founding partner of Echelon Insights.

“These off-year elections are showing that 2020 wasn’t a fluke,” Ruffini said, adding that Latinos should be viewed more like swing voters.

Fernand Amandi, a Latino pollster who advised Obama’s successful Hispanic outreach campaigns, said there’s no way to reconcile the two polls. “One of them is wrong,” he said.

Exit polls have become trickier to perform today than in the past, when most people voted on Election Day and it was easier for interviewers to grab voters at precincts after they cast their ballots. Now, Amandi said, large portions of the electorate vote before Election Day, forcing pollsters to try to reach voters by phone, text message or internet web panel. When the sample sizes are small — as with Hispanic voters in Virginia — the task becomes even more complicated.

Amandi, who didn’t poll in Virginia this year, said the trends disfavor Democrats when it comes to Latinos.

“This idea that we’re going to blame the exit poll methodology rather than admit the obvious — that Republicans are making inroads with Hispanic voters — is an act of self-delusion,” he said.

Ryan Enos, a Harvard University political scientist who studies demographic voting patterns, told POLITICO that the massive gap between the two polls merits further study “to see if they pass the smell test or not and, when there’s that big of a gap, one of them doesn’t pass the smell test.”

Since Youngkin ran so far ahead of Trump in Virginia, Enos said, “it’s reasonable to assume you would see that shift with Hispanic voters.”

But that doesn’t account for the Edison Research exit poll finding that, despite underperforming Biden, McAuliffe improved his margins with Hispanic voters.

Overall, Enos said, Latinos seem to be gravitating more toward Republicans, noting a red shift in Latino areas of Passaic County, New Jersey, on Tuesday

“It is really evidence that Democratic support from Hispanic voters is eroding in a way that will have damaging implications if it becomes permanent,” Enos said.

Several Democratic pollsters and political operatives agreed that the party has work to do with Latinos, regardless of which poll hit the mark Tuesday.

“Democrats should be worried about the electorate more broadly — and should be concerned that … what we saw among Latinos in 2020 was not specific to Trump,” Odio said. “That, one way or another, requires a lot of attention.”

Source Article from https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/04/latino-poll-virginia-youngkin-mcauliffe-519425

In February, 25-year-old Ahmaud Arbery was shot dead in the south Georgia neighborhood of Satilla Shores. In the two months that followed, no arrests were made. But local residents and lawmakers protested what they said was a deadly combination of racial profiling and flawed self-defense laws. “When they stop you, make sure you got your cameras on. Make sure you got a video.” Police did eventually arrest 2 suspects, but it was days after this video of the fatal shooting emerged. Gregory McMichael and his son Travis were charged with murder and aggravated assault. The case has reignited the national debate over racial violence. “I’m sure you saw the news about Ahmaud Arbery.” “It looks like murder.” “The American public saw the video.” What exactly happened in the last moments of Mr. Arbery’s life? Using security camera footage, cellphone video, and 911 calls and logs, The Times has reconstructed the critical 12 minutes from when Mr. Arbery appeared on Satilla Drive to his death, less than 300 yards away. It’s around 1 p.m. on Feb. 23 when Ahmaud Arbery is out, less than 2 miles from his home. A security camera at 219 Satilla Drive is recording when Mr. Arbery enters the frame at around 1:04 p.m. He may have been jogging in the area, but he stops on the front lawn of 220 Satilla, a house being built across the street. Arbery glances around and wanders into the open construction site. Inside, security footage briefly captures him looking around. Meanwhile outside, a neighbor walks from Jones Road towards Satilla Drive and calls 911. The neighbor waits by the street corner. He will later tell the dispatcher that Arbery resembles a recent trespasser in the area. On multiple occasions before Feb. 23, several trespassers were caught on camera at 220 Satilla. The owner routinely alerted the police. On four occasions, what appears to be the same man was filmed. It’s unclear if this was Arbery, but even if it were, this does not justify his shooting by neighbors outside on the street. The site’s owner says nothing was ever stolen from the house during these incidents or on Feb. 23, and no property was ever damaged. But neighbors were aware of the trespasses and the community was on alert. Now, back to the day in question. It’s 1:08 p.m. and Arbery is walking around inside the house. Four minutes after he entered, he walks out and runs off. In the top corner of the security footage, we can see down the street to 230 Satilla, the home of Travis McMichael. At 1:10 p.m., Travis and his father, Gregory, grab their guns, jump in a white truck, and leave the house to pursue Mr. Arbery. We don’t have footage showing the next 3 minutes, but testimony Gregory McMichael gave police at the scene, and interviews by another witness, Roddy Bryan, indicate what happened. Gregory and Travis McMichael follow Arbery onto Burford Road. Their neighbor Roddy Bryan sees the pursuit, gets in his car and follows. The McMichaels try to cut Arbery off. Arbery doubles back and passes them. Bryan tries to block Arbery, but Arbery runs past him and toward Holmes Road. Gregory McMichael climbs from the cab to the bed of the truck armed with a handgun. We don’t know exactly what happens next. But Bryan and the McMichaels end up following Arbery on Holmes Road. And we next see Arbery at 1:14 p.m. running back down Holmes Road away from Roddy Bryan and toward the McMichaels. Roddy Bryan is filming and — a warning — these scenes are distressing. Gregory McMichael dials 911 at this time. Let’s watch this back and break down what happens. This is Arbery. He has been running from the vehicles for almost 4 minutes. Travis is standing by the driver’s side of the truck, armed with a shotgun. Gregory is in the bed of the truck on the 911 call. Arbery doesn’t know where to run. He veers right, then left and then darts around the right side of the vehicle. Arbery comes around the front of the truck. We see his white T-shirt through the windshield and here is Travis now leaning toward him. This is the instant the first shot is fired. Arbery is hit in the chest, his right lung, ribs, and sternum are injured. The two men wrestle over the gun. Gregory shouts: “Travis!” Arbery punches Travis. In the back of the truck, Gregory drops the cellphone. A second blast goes off out of frame. But we see the shotgun smoke here. Arbery is heavily bleeding. He throws another punch. Travis fires a final shot, which hits Arbery in his left upper chest. Travis walks away holding his gun. Gregory gets off the truck clutching his .357 Magnum. According to the police report, Gregory rolled Arbery over to see if he had a weapon. He did not. Police officers arrive within seconds of the shooting, and a minute or so later at 1:16 p.m., Police Officer R. Minshew reports: Two subjects on Holmes Road. Shots fired. Male on ground bleeding out. The police took Gregory McMichael’s testimony and let the two men go. But now the McMichaels both face serious charges. Hi, this is Malachy and I reported this story. For transparency, a note about the security footage used in this video, which was first published by The Atlanta Journal Constitution. The time code you see here is incorrect. We know this because we lined up what we see in this video with what we hear in two 911 calls and we confirmed the time of those calls. These details and police logs also allowed us to determine that Gregory McMichael called 911 from his son’s phone just before the fatal shooting. So in this video, we used the real time that events happened. Thank you for watching.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/03/us/ahmaud-arbery-killing-trial-jury-selection-race.html

In an interview with The New York Times in 2020, Mr. Danchenko defended the integrity of his work, saying he had been tasked to gather “raw intelligence” and was simply passing it on to Mr. Steele. Mr. Danchenko — who made his name as a Russia analyst by exposing indications that the dissertation of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia contained plagiarized material — also denied being a Russian agent.

“I’ve never been a Russian agent,” Mr. Danchenko said. “It is ridiculous to suggest that. This, I think, it’s slander.”

Mr. Steele’s efforts were part of opposition research that Democrats were indirectly funding by the time the 2016 general election took shape. Mr. Steele’s business intelligence firm was a subcontractor to another research firm, Fusion GPS, which in turn had been hired by the Perkins Coie law firm, which was working for the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Mr. Danchenko said he did not know who Mr. Steele’s client was at the time and considered himself a nonpartisan analyst and researcher.

Mr. Durham has been known to be interested in Mr. Danchenko and the Steele dossier saga. In February, he used a subpoena to obtain old personnel files and other documents related to Mr. Danchenko from the Brookings Institution, where Mr. Danchenko had worked from 2005 until 2010.

The charges against Mr. Danchenko follow Mr. Durham’s indictment in September of a cybersecurity lawyer, Michael Sussmann, which accused him of lying to the F.B.I. about who he was working for when he brought concerns about possible Trump-Russia links to the bureau in September 2016.

Mr. Sussmann, who then also worked for Perkins Coie, was relaying concerns developed by data scientists about odd internet logs they said suggested the possibility of a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, a Kremlin-linked financial institution. He has denied lying to the F.B.I. about who he was working for.

William K. Rashbaum contributed reporting.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/04/us/igor-danchenko-arrested-steele-dossier.html