Breck Dumas


The president called the interview ‘fake’ and ‘biased’

President Donald Trump reportedly cut short a sit-down interview with CBS News correspondent Lesley Stahl on Tuesday, arguing afterward on Twitter that the interview for the show “60 Minutes” was “fake” and “biased.”

The president also threatened to release the footage himself before it is scheduled to air Sunday along with Norah O’Donnell’s interviews with Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and his running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris (Calif.).

What are the details?

CBS News reported that the president “cut short” the interview, noting that Trump campaign adviser Jason Miller “disputed reporting that the interview had ended abruptly.”

“Very fake news!” Miller tweeted in reaction to reporting from CNN. “No drama, interview was not ended abruptly and we have the receipts from the interview – all of them! Maybe we need to put the whole thing out so people can see for themselves? Lesley’s a bad example for mask wearing, Kaitlan – don’t follow her lead!!!”

Politico reported that Trump was frustrated with the line of questioning and how the interview was being conducted, said one person familiar with the episode. After a short break, Vice President Mike Pence also spent 15 minutes with Stahl and the “60 Minutes” crew.

President Trump tweeted after the interview, “I am pleased to inform you that, for the sake of accuracy in reporting, I am considering posting my interview with Lesley Stahl of 60 Minutes, PRIOR TO AIRTIME! This will be done so that everybody can get a glimpse of what a FAKE and BIASED interview is all about…”

He added, “…Everyone should compare this terrible Electoral Intrusion with the recent interviews of Sleepy Joe Biden!”

The Daily Caller noted:

Trump and several members of the White House press office began tweeting anecdotes critical of Stahl shortly after the interview concluded. Trump criticized her for not wearing a mask after the interview, with White House Deputy Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt adding that Stahl had criticized her for not wearing a mask earlier that day.

Trump and several members of the White House press office began tweeting anecdotes critical of Stahl shortly after the interview concluded. Trump criticized her for not wearing a mask after the interview, with White House Deputy Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt adding that Stahl had criticized her for not wearing a mask earlier that day.

Tuesday’s interview is Stahl’s third with the president. She first sat down with him along with his family in 2016 when he was president-elect, and again in 2018.

Author: Breck Dumas

Source: The Blaze: President Trump cuts short ’60 Minutes’ interview with Lesley Stahl, threatens to release footage himself

President Trump says he might reconsider if the NATO ally starts ‘paying their bills’

The United States announced plans Wednesday to withdraw 12,000 American troops from Germany, as President Donald Trump continues pressing the NATO ally to contribute more in common defense spending.

What are the details?

The Associated Press reported that “the U.S. will bring about 6,400 forces home and shift about 5,600 to other countries in Europe” as part of “a Pentagon plan that will cost billions of dollars and take years to complete.”

“We’re moving forces out of central Europe, Germany, where they’ve been since the Cold War,” Defense Secretary Mark Esper explained,” saying that forces will be shifted closer to Russia, “where our newest allies are.” Esper added that some troops may be temporarily deployed to the Baltics.

The move comes after President Trump vowed last month to cut the number of U.S. troops in Germany by one third due to the ally’s failure “to meet NATO’s defense spending target,” according to The Sydney Morning Herald. There are currently around 36,000 American military personnel in the country.

“We don’t want to be the suckers anymore,” President Trump told reporters outside the White House on Wednesday, regarding the decision. “We’re reducing the force because they’re not paying their bills. It’s very simple. They’re delinquent.”

He added that he might reconsider the decision to withdraw troops from Germany “if they start paying their bills.”

ArmyTimes noted that the U.S. Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps all base their European command headquarters in Germany. But part of Germany’s position as a central hub in the region will also be revoked as part of the Pentagon’s plan.

CBS News reported:

The headquarters for the European Command and the European Special Operations Command, currently located in Stuttgart, Germany, will be relocated to NATO headquarters in Belgium. Esper said this would begin within weeks and cost several billion dollars.

Anything else?

Republican Sen. Mitt Romeny (Utah), a frequent critic of the president, blasted the decision, saying in a statement, “The plan outlined by the Administration today to remove thousands of U.S. troops from Germany is a grave error. It is a slap in the face at a friend and ally.”

But NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said allies were already aware of U.S. plans, which were welcomed by Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda who said in a statement: “I value very favourably the news that the US mentioned possibility of moving some troops to the Baltic countries.”

Author: Breck Dumas

Source: The Blaze: U.S. to pull 12,000 troops out of Germany

The Trump campaign called the proposal a ‘socialist manifesto’

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden unveiled a “plan to build a modern, sustainable infrastructure and an equitable clean energy future” on Tuesday, which carries a purported price tag of at least $2 trillion.

The campaign for President Donald Trump quickly blasted the proposal, likening it to a “socialist manifesto.”

What are the details?

Biden’s plan would spend $2 trillion over the “first term” of his presidency to create “millions of good, union jobs” on infrastructure, including building “zero-emissions public transportation options” in every U.S. city with a population of 100,000 or more, “achieve a carbon pollution-free power sector by 2035,” while ensuring “that environmental justice is a key consideration in where, how, and with whom we build.”

The proposal also promises to expand “broadband, or wireless broadband via 5G to every American,” to use federal dollars for “purchasing the key clean energy outputs like batteries and electric vehicles,” make a “historic investment” in order to upgrade “4 million buildings and weatherize 2 million homes,” and launch a “Civilian Climate Corps.”

CBS News reported that “the Biden campaign says the plan would be paid for with a combination of stimulus and increases in the corporate tax rate.” The outlet noted that “the plan also offers commitments to improve highways and roads, but like the original infrastructure plan, he does not offer any long-term funding source for the Highway Trust Fund, which is facing going broke.”

What was the Trump reaction?

Hogan Gidley, Trump’s 2020 national press secretary, issued a statement in response to Biden’s plan, which read:

Joe Biden just bragged about a plan that kills more than 10 million American jobs supported by the energy industries and makes sure the United States is once against dependent on foreign countries for energy. His plan is more like a socialist manifesto that promises to massively raise taxes, eliminate jobs in the coal, oil or natural gas industries, and crush the middle class. Now more than ever, it’s clear that Biden is beholden to the radical socialist ideology of Senator Bernie Sanders, and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and there is no way he can sell this radical agenda to union workers in energy-producing, manufacturing, or auto industry states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, or Wisconsin. We already know what would happen in a Joe Biden economy because for eight long years the American worker was forgotten and we had the slowest economy since the Great Depression — and now he’s pushing extreme policies that would smother the economy just when it’s showing signs of roaring back.

Author: Breck Dumas

Source: The Blaze: Joe Biden rolls out $2 trillion climate plan promising ‘an equitable clean energy future’

Indoor operations are now prohibited for restaurants, movie theaters, and most churches

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) issued a decree Monday ordering the re-closure of several indoor operations statewide, including restaurants, and expanding restrictions on businesses and churches in the most impacted counties as COVID-19 cases continue to climb.

What are the details?

The Office of the Governor of California alerted citizens that Newsom’s order prohibits indoor operations statewide for dine-in restaurants, wineries, movie theaters, zoos, museums, cardrooms and family entertainment centers, and emphasizes that “bars must close ALL operations.”

For 30 counties on the governor’s “monitoring list,” gyms, places of worship, hair salons, spas, and malls must also cease any indoor activities. According to the Los Angeles Times, those counties hold roughly 80% of the state’s population.

The New York Times called Newsom’s move “one of the most sweeping rollbacks of any state’s reopening plans,” as California averages “more than 8,000 new cases a day…more than double what it was a month ago.”

Newsom explained, “We’re going back into modification mode of our original stay at home order. This continues to be a deadly disease.”

Anything else?

Also on Monday, the San Diego and Los Angeles school districts issued a joint statement announcing that they would not resume in-person classes following the summer break. All instruction will resume on time, but will be conducted entirely online.

The districts explained in their memo:

Unfortunately, much of the research is incomplete and many of the guidelines are vague and contradictory. One fact is clear: those countries that have managed to safely reopen schools have done so with declining infection rates and on-demand testing available. California has neither. The skyrocketing infection rates of the past few weeks make it clear the pandemic is not under control.

The Hill noted that “the Trump administration has threatened to withhold federal funding from schools that do not reopen for in-person instruction this fall.”

Author: Breck Dumas

Source: The Blaze: California Gov. Newsom orders statewide re-closures as coronavirus cases rise: ‘This continues to be a deadly disease’

Biden’s accuser says Clinton has a ‘history’ of providing cover for ‘powerful men’

Tara Reade slammed Hillary Clinton for endorsing former vice president Joe Biden’s bid for the White House on Tuesday, and accused the 2016 Democratic nominee of “enabling a sexual predator.”

Reade — who says Biden sexually assaulted her in 1993 while she worked in his Senate office — also blasted Clinton as having “a history of enabling powerful men to cover up” such behavior.

What are the details?

Clinton joined Biden for a virtual town hall about “the impact of COVID-19 on women,” and during the livestream, the former secretary of state offered her endorsement of Biden.

In reaction to the news, Reade told Fox News, “I voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. I voted for her in the primary. I’m a lifelong Democrat. But yet, what I see now is someone enabling a sexual predator and it was my former boss, Joe Biden, who raped me.”

“Hillary Clinton has a history of enabling powerful men to cover up their sexual predatory behaviors and their inappropriate sexual misconduct,” Reade continued. “We don’t need that for this country. We don’t need that for our new generation coming up that wants institutional rape culture to change.”

She added, “I will not be smeared, dismissed or ignored. I stand in truth and I will keep speaking out.”

Reade’s accusations against Biden were not brought up during the women’s town hall, and Biden has not yet been asked in any press interviews to address the sexual assault claim.

Biden has not personally responded to Reade’s accusations against him at all, but his campaign has insisted her claims are false and supplied a statement from Biden’s longtime Senate office manager who insists that there were never reports of inappropriate behavior against Biden from Reade or anyone else during her tenure.

Reade maintains that she did file a complaint against Biden during her time working in the Senate, and believes the documentation exists to back her up. But the records are currently stored by the University of Delaware Library.

Also on Tuesday, Reade called on Biden to have those documents released. In a statement to the Daily Caller, she said, “Joe Biden, I want you to release all the personnel records from 1973 to 2009 and be transparent about your office practices. I would like to hold you accountable for what happened to me, to how your staff protected you and enabled you, bullied me multiple times into silence.”

Reade explained to Fox News, “I’m calling for the release of the documents being held by the University of Delaware that contain Biden’s staff personnel records because I believe it will have my complaint form, as well as my separation letter and other documents.”

She added, “Maybe if other staffers that have tried to file complaints would come to light — why are they under seal? And why won’t they be released to the public?”

Author: Breck Dumas

Source: The Blaze: Tara Reade torches Hillary Clinton for endorsing Biden, says she’s ‘enabling a sexual predator’

Mainstream outlets accused of covering for Democrats, once again

Numerous media outlets changed their initial headlines Thursday after reporting that Democrats blocked GOP-led efforts to provide further small business relief during the coronavirus pandemic, reinforcing the belief held by many conservatives that mainstream news is often geared toward providing cover for the political left.

What are the details?

CNN, NBC News, Politico, and the New York Times all changed their initial headlines and scrubbed away blame on Democrats, while CNBC (in contrast) kept its headline that reads, “Senate adjourns until Monday after Democrats block McConnell’s bid to add $250 billion in small business aid.”

Becket Adams of the Washington Examiner assembled a collection of many of the changes, noting in a commentary piece that CNN changed its headline from “Democrats block GOP-led funding boost for small business aid program” to “Senate at stalemate over more COVID-19 aid after Republicans and Democrats block competing proposals.”

The Daily Caller reported that CNN’s headline “was edited within an hour to be less critical” of Democrats.

Politico’s initial headline for its story on the Senate actions read, “Senate Dems to block new coronavirus relief in bid for more money,” before being changed to, “Senate brawl derails fast push for new coronavirus relief.”

The New York Times went from reporting, “Democrats block G.O.P. proposal for aid to businesses, request more funds,” to publishing a new headline that now reads, “As Economy Hemorrhages Jobs, Aid Stalls in Senate.”

The Daily Caller’s Greg Price provided images on Twitter showing that NBC News’ first headline read, “Senate Democrats block GOP bid for $250 billion in small-business funds amid impasse over coronavirus aid.” The outlet later changed it to, “Senate hits impasse over $250 billion in coronavirus small-business funds.”

Price included the example with CNN’s headline change and wrote, “I’m pretty sure the Daily Caller updating our headlines like this if Republicans were to block a coronavirus relief [bill] would not be met with a positive reaction from liberal politics media.”

Anything else?

Thursday morning, a Bloomberg reporter tweeted in all caps, “SENATE DEMOCRATS BLOCK $250 BILLION SMALL-BUSINESS AID PLAN.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) retweeted the message and wrote, “Senate Democrats just blocked urgent money for a popular, bipartisan job-saving program which they themselves literally coauthored with us two weeks ago. I complimented both sides and asked to increase the dollar amount without changing anything else. But they blocked it.”

CNBC reported that McConnell “tried to approve the measure by a unanimous vote” in order to get it passed quickly, but Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) stalled the legislation, calling it a “political stunt” and saying “it would not address the immediate needs of small businesses.”

Author: Breck Dumas

Source: The Blaze: Several media outlets change headlines after first noting Democrats blocked small business relief

Impeached forever? The GOP says not so fast.

House Republicans say they plan to remove the impeachment of President Donald Trump from the “books” if they regain power of the lower chamber in 2021, a move they began plotting even before the president was acquitted in the Senate on Wednesday.

While Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) declared that President Trump’s “impeachment will last forever,” members of the GOP say expunging the impeachment of the president is a very real possibility — even if it is largely symbolic.

What are the details?

The New York Post spoke with several members of the House GOP in an article published ahead of Wednesday’s Senate acquittal. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) told the outlet, “This is the fastest, weakest, most political impeachment in history. I don’t think it should stay on the books.”

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) concurred, telling The Post, “The president should have never been impeached in the first place,” calling expungement “a good idea.”

Over the weekend, Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.) declared on Twitter, “The House of Representatives should EXPUNGE this shame impeachment in January 2021! This was absolutely disgusting what Pelosi and [House impeachment manager Adam Schiff (D-Calif.)] just dragged our country through. The end is near not only for impeachment, but hopefully also for their abusive grip on their gavels.”

Legal scholar Jonathan Turley — who was called by Republicans to testify during House impeachment proceedings — told The Post that even if the House were to vote on expunging the impeachment of the president, the move “would be more cathartic than constitutional.”

Turley reasoned, “Trump is impeached…Even if the Senate were to cancel the trial or dismiss the charges, impeachment is a historical and unavoidable fact.”

George Washington University professor Sarah Binder agrees. She told the Washington Examiner, “If a future Republican House were to vote to expunge the House-passed impeachment resolution, it would be a purely symbolic, even cosmetic move.”

Binder added, “This current House agreed to H.Res. 755. And while a future House could adopt a resolution that says it is striking the adoption from the Record, that doesn’t undo the fact that the current House agreed to those two articles of impeachment.”

Anything else?

Whether the record of the House impeachment is expunged or not, Minority Leader McCarthy declared after the Senate found the president “not guilty” that President Trump is now “acquitted for life.”

Author: Breck Dumas

Source: The Blaze: Republicans plan to expunge impeachment of President Trump if they take back the House

The Senate majority leader also told Republicans he expects Nancy Pelosi to send over the articles soon

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has signed on as a co-sponsor of a resolution allowing Senate rules to be changed in order to allow impeachment articles to be dismissed as the upper chamber continues to wait for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to end her hold on the articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump.

What are the details?

The resolution was introduced by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) on Monday, and would change Senate rules so that if the House of Representatives fails to submit articles of impeachment to the Senate within 25 calendar days of their adoption, any senator may “offer a motion to dismiss such articles with prejudice for failure by the House of Representatives to prosecute such articles.”

Axios noted that if Speaker Pelosi continues stalling the transfer of the articles of impeachment, the 25-day mark for her hold falls this Sunday, Jan. 12.

In announcing his intention for filing the resolution, Hawley likened Pelosi’s refusal to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate to a prosecutor refusing to proceed with a case, saying that “in the real world” a case would be dismissed in such an instance.

The original co-sponsors of the resolution were GOP Sens. Rick Scott (Fla.), Mike Braun (Ind.), Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.), Ted Cruz (Texas), Steve Daines (Mont.), John Barrasso (Wyo.), Tom Cotton (Ark.), Joni Ernst (Iowa), David Perdue (Ga.), and Jim Inhofe (Okla.).

Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Kelly Loeffler (R-Ga.) jumped on board Tuesday, and Sen. McConnell signed on as the 13th co-sponsor on Thursday.

Anything else?

According to Politico, Sen. McConnell also told GOP senators on Thursday that he expects Pelosi could send the articles of impeachment to the Senate soon — possibly as early as Friday. The outlet reported that “most Republicans are now gearing up for the relentless pace of the impeachment trial to start on Monday or Tuesday.”

Author: Breck Dumas

Source: The Blaze: Mitch McConnell signs on to resolution allowing dismissal of impeachment without articles

The congressman from New York says the gun control legislation is ‘timely now’

Republican Rep. Peter King (N.Y.) on Monday signed on to the Assault Weapons Ban of 2019, becoming the first GOP House member to co-sponsor the legislation backed by 200 Democrats.

What are the details?

The bill, H.R. 1296, “makes it a crime to knowingly import, sell, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapons (SAW) or large capacity ammunition feeding device (LCAFD).

Congressman King told the New York Daily News that such firearms “are weapons of mass slaughter,” and he “doesn’t see any need for them in everyday society.”

While the New York Republican had already been considering signing on to the legislation — which was proposed by Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) back in February — King said , “I think the assault weapons ban is timely now, especially in view of the shooting in El Paso and Dayton.”

King also said that he hoped his move would encourage more of his colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join him in backing the ban, adding, “It might give cover to some other Republicans, it might give some incentive to Democrats.”

Cicilline praised King for signing on to the legislation, telling the Daily News, “These weapons belong on the battlefield, not in our homes, schools, houses of worship or workplaces. I’m pleased that Congressman King has joined this effort. I sincerely hope that more of my Republican colleagues will put their service to our country and the safety of their constituents ahead of their need to raise campaign money from the gun lobby.”

The Hill reported that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has promised to block such legislation in the Republican-led upper chamber, and President Donald Trump has “expressed opposition to the bill.”

Anything else?

Rep. King has sponsored a number of gun control proposals in the past, as noted by Newsday, and the GOP congressman has an “F” rating from the National Rifle Association.

Author: Breck Dumas

Source: The Blaze: GOP Rep. Peter King joins House Dems in backing ‘assault weapons’ ban

The Democratic leadership in the House has a decision to make

A Democratic congressman filed articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump late Tuesday night, forcing the House of Representatives to schedule a vote on the move.

All eyes are now on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) — who opposes immediate impeachment proceedings — to see how leadership will handle the matter.

What are the details?

Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) filed the articles of impeachment in reaction to recent comments President Trump made on Twitter regarding four progressive congresswomen. Trump suggested Democratic Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (Minn.), Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.) “go back” to the countries they “originally came from.”

All of the women are American citizens, and three of them were born in the U.S. The president’s tweets drew widespread condemnation, but he denied having any racist intentions behind his comments.

While the Democrat-led House passed a resolution (amid chaos) condemning the president’s comments on Tuesday, Pelosi has long maintained that she is opposed to pursuing impeachment proceedings against the president until ongoing congressional investigations involving his administration have concluded.

She confirmed to Politico on Wednesday that she does not support Green’s move, which is being forced because it is a privileged motion and can be introduced by any member.

House leadership now has a decision to make. An impeachment-related vote is expected to occur as early as 4 p.m. Wednesday, and they may opt to proceed with the resolution, table it, or send it off to committee.

In the instance that the resolution is directed to committee or tabled, Pelosi risks angering an already rebellious progressive wing of her divided caucus, which has been emboldened by the furor over President Trump’s tweets.

But if Pelosi brings it to the floor for a vote, she faces risks whether it passes or fails, because either scenario could result in the resolution’s ultimate demise. Knowing this, Republicans might even vote against tabling the motion or sending the resolution to committee in order to force an up-or-down vote.

If impeachment passes in the House, any attempts to remove the president from office is likely destined for failure given the likelihood that the GOP-led Senate would not vote to convict.

If it fails in the House, many would see it as a rebuke of far-left Democrats who are focused on removing Trump from the White House and as a major political victory for a president who is in the throes of a reelection bid.

Anything else?

Rep. Green has been chomping at the bit to see President Trump ousted from office. The Texas congressman twice presented articles of impeachment against the president, according to Politico, but his previous attempts stopped by the then-Republican majority in the House.

Green believes now is the time to make his move after the House condemnation of the president, despite pushback from his party’s leadership. He told CNN Wednesday, “As a result of what we did yesterday, the president suffers no harm, he doesn’t have to pay any fine, he’s not going to lose his job. But today, we have the opportunity to punish.”

Author: Breck Dumas

Source: The Blaze: Dem. Rep. Al Green defies Pelosi, files articles of impeachment against President Trump. Move will force Democrats to cast divisive vote.

Ad Blocker Detected!

Advertisements fund this website. Please disable your adblocking software or whitelist our website.
Thank You!