Joe Biden is now POTUS
- Thread starter Spectrum
- Start date
USA Armenian genocide resolution
# Story Highlights # NEW: House panel passes resolution 27-21 # Bush said passage of resolution would cause "great harm" # House resolution calls killing of Armenians during World War I "genocide" # Turkish president says passage of resolution would create a "backlash"...
www.bgol.us
NEW YORK — Brendan Hunt, an enthusiastic Trump supporter who called for killing members of Congress days after the Jan. 6 insurrection, was found guilty Wednesday of making a death threat against elected officials.
It took the jury in his case about three hours to reach a verdict, finding that comments Hunt made in a disturbing video posted online two days after the U.S. Capitol riot amounted to a genuine threat to murder elected officials in Washington.
He faces up to 10 years in prison.
The jury also concluded that menacing social media posts Hunt made in 2020 — including one directed at Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), then the Senate minority leader, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) — did not rise to the level of criminality.
Hunt, 37, was charged with one count of making a threat to assault and murder a United States official. He was arrested Jan. 19, a day before President Biden’s inauguration, after the FBI received a tip about his video, titled “KILL YOUR SENATORS: Slaughter them all.”
The clip had been posted on BitChute, a hosting site popular with far-right conservatives, after the deadly riot in Washington.
Ima beat @Supersav to the punch and post this comment. They took the bait and in order for it to stay out of the press, they decide to alienate us so they can complete their agenda. Well they're opposition will easily come back and say now their isn't a need for equity. Joe being Joe. The expectations was always low. Video starts at the mark of his comments towards Racism.
Poll that found 85% of viewers approved of Biden's joint session address was based on a largely Democratic audience, according to CBS News and Snopes
In a survey by CBS News and YouGov, more than eight in 10 viewers who tuned in approved of President Biden's remarks. Of those who watched Biden's address, 54% identified as Democrats, 18% as Republican and 25% as independent, according to CBS News.
What you need to know
- The survey was based on 943 interviews of adults who tuned in, and drawn from an earlier national YouGov survey of more than 10,000 people.
- Presidential speech audiences have become increasingly partisan, according to decades of CBS News poll data.
@easy_b
In a survey by CBS News and YouGov, more than eight in 10 viewers who tuned in approved of President Biden's remarks. Of those who watched Biden's address, 54% identified as Democrats, 18% as Republican and 25% as independent, according to CBS News.
What you need to know
- The survey was based on 943 interviews of adults who tuned in, and drawn from an earlier national YouGov survey of more than 10,000 people.
- Presidential speech audiences have become increasingly partisan, according to decades of CBS News poll data.
@easy_b
I don’t know if anybody has noticed.
But Biden’s speech the other night was nothing new or spectacular and had been said before.
President Obama pretty much was saying the same shit during his first 100 days in office and thru 2009.
The difference is Obama got major pushback from the GOP, the news media and from the formation of the Tea Party out on the streets with signs like “Keep Your Government Hands Off My Medicare.
And Obama was barely getting support from Democrats.
Everybody was pretty much doing there part to make him a one term President and seal his legacy as a failure.
There was talk from Obama and a few others of doing a stimulus to American’s early in 2009 to help with the mortgage crisis. Obama was pushed back and went along with giving the money to the banks who basically used it to give themselves bonus’ and did less than minimal to help with the mortgage crisis.
He was talking about infrastructure the way Biden had been, but got pushbacks with stupid talk about the debt/deficit and having Government shutdowns.
And with Biden, it’s been basically silence. The only folks mouthing off are McConnell and the GOP in Washington.
Nobody is on the street yelling about no Big Government spending.
Joe Biden is boring — and it's driving the media crazy
Yes, Biden is boring. It is why he is just what the country needs to restore some sense into politics
By AMANDA MARCOTTE
MARCH 15, 2021 4:49PM (UTC)
www.salon.com
After years of relentless reality show antics caused by Donald Trump, the latest word in the cable news discourse is that President Joe Biden is boring. He spends all his time doing policy work and his press engagement is a total snoozefest, with nary a single unhinged rant in front of buzzing helicopter blades. And the mainstream press is starting to get annoyed by it.
Last week, the Washington Post editorial board complained, "Avoiding news conferences must not become a regular habit for Mr. Biden," even while grumpily admitting that, unlike Trump, Biden's White House has daily press briefings that "are informative, not forums for White House lackeys to attack journalists." Over the weekend, the clamor for press conferences featuring Biden himself grew louder, with members of the White House press corps such as Jonathan Karl of ABC News admitting that "reporters like press conferences and will always demand them" while insisting "press conferences are for the public's benefit." Peter Baker of the New York Times then picked up the baton:
Click Above Link To View Social Media Post
It all sounds very noble until one remembers that the press is comparing Biden disfavorably to Trump, who literally incited an insurrection only two months ago, and is benefiting handsomely from mainstream media worried more about counting press conferences than about the ongoing national instability caused by an increasingly radical right.
Trump loved making himself available to the press, due to his severe personality disorder driving him to thrive on attention and conflict. No one can honestly say that led to anywhere good. Perhaps that's why on social media there was a great deal of skepticism of demands for more press conferences featuring Biden instead of his wholly competent (yet also boring) press secretary, Jen Psaki. Many folks — including many journalists — appeared to believe that the press is less interested in asking Biden substantive questions, and more interested in trying to corner him with fatuous bait about Dr. Seuss or Mr. Potato Head or "cancel culture" or whatever other trollish inanities are being favored by the Fox News crowd these days.
And sure enough, Mike Allen of Axios proved the point by complaining on CNN that Biden was keeping his nose out of the ongoing controversy around Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York, who has been accused of sexual harassment by multiple women.
To be certain, sexual harassment is a serious issue. However, New York Democrats are doing just fine calling for Cuomo's resignation on their own. It's clear that Allen is less interested in Biden's opinion out of a noble desire to end the scourge of sexual harassment and more out of a salacious desire to stoke intra-party conflict among Democrats. It's worth remembering that reporters let Republicans slide for years in their support for Trump, who is on tape bragging about sexual assault, mostly because it was understood that Republicans would stay united behind the belief that sexual abuse is no big deal. As media critic Eric Boehlert noted in the Monday edition of his newsletter, the press is "creating conflict and controversy where none exists," to the point of absurdity with stories about Biden like when "the New York Times dinged him for being out of touch with voters because of the expensive watch he wears, and the exercise bicycle he uses" while workers were still cleaning up damage to the Capitol from Trump's insurrection.
One person who very much agrees with the mainstream journalists complaining about Biden's terminal boringness is Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Tx., who shared a meme on Twitter over the weekend describing the president as "boring but radical." Radical, of course, is the conservative code word for any Democratic policy that is actually enacted, no matter how mainstream or uncontroversial. Which are two words that perfectly encapsulate Biden's recently passed American Rescue Plan, which polls show ranges from 61% to nearly 70% approval with voters. But mostly this was Cruz, like the mainstream journalists he claims to oppose so much, trying to bait Biden into being a little less of a boring bureaucrat.
Cruz, of course, is very much the opposite of Biden. He loves trolling for attention and getting into petty culture war fights, but doesn't so much like doing the actual job of governing, which is why he didn't think twice about abandoning Texas for a Cancun vacation during the winter storm crisis last month. Cruz tried to slot the Cancun story into the "inane bullshit" category, even though there were legitimate policy concerns around his global warming denialism and his support of deregulation, which contributed to the crisis. But his whining about Biden being "boring" exposed the reality, which is that Cruz — and Republicans in general — are the ones who benefit when the media focuses on silly non-controversies, instead of on important-but-boring policy concerns.
Republicans know full well they lose any debate that's focused on actual policy, which is why the party didn't even bother to have a platform during the 2020 election. So Republicans are desperate to make the topic du jour about anything but policy, grasping desperately at Potato Heads and Dr. Seuss, so they don't have to talk about their opposition to efforts to end the pandemic and restore the American economy.
Biden's refusal to take the bait helps cut off oxygen to such bullshit.
The Dr. Seuss story, for instance, is already running out of steam because Biden isn't on hand to give quotes for Fox News to pretend to be offended by. Republicans are nothing but trolls these days. There are plenty of people on hand who can handle the fake outrage about children's toys and "cancel culture" without wasting Biden's time. For his purpose, Biden's smartest move when dealing with trolls is not to feed them.
To be certain, the idea that the president should do more press conferences sounds good and reasonable in the abstract. In our current climate, however, there's a serious need for everyone — politicians, pundits, journalists, even news consumers — to detox after years of Trump's roller coaster of manufactured drama.
Trump turned governing into a reality TV show akin to "The Apprentice." Turning it back into a real government may just depend on Biden's ability to stop feeding the beast. There is no reason to think Biden will hold out on press conferences forever, but by keeping them lean and mean, he can hopefully train the press to focus on issues that matter instead of wasting everyone's time with "gotchas" and right wing-generated nonsense.
Yes, Biden is boring. It is why he is just what the country needs to restore some sense into politics
By AMANDA MARCOTTE
MARCH 15, 2021 4:49PM (UTC)
Joe Biden is boring — and it's driving the media crazy
Yes, Biden is boring. It is why he is just what the country needs to restore some sense into politics
www.salon.com
After years of relentless reality show antics caused by Donald Trump, the latest word in the cable news discourse is that President Joe Biden is boring. He spends all his time doing policy work and his press engagement is a total snoozefest, with nary a single unhinged rant in front of buzzing helicopter blades. And the mainstream press is starting to get annoyed by it.
Last week, the Washington Post editorial board complained, "Avoiding news conferences must not become a regular habit for Mr. Biden," even while grumpily admitting that, unlike Trump, Biden's White House has daily press briefings that "are informative, not forums for White House lackeys to attack journalists." Over the weekend, the clamor for press conferences featuring Biden himself grew louder, with members of the White House press corps such as Jonathan Karl of ABC News admitting that "reporters like press conferences and will always demand them" while insisting "press conferences are for the public's benefit." Peter Baker of the New York Times then picked up the baton:
Click Above Link To View Social Media Post
It all sounds very noble until one remembers that the press is comparing Biden disfavorably to Trump, who literally incited an insurrection only two months ago, and is benefiting handsomely from mainstream media worried more about counting press conferences than about the ongoing national instability caused by an increasingly radical right.
Trump loved making himself available to the press, due to his severe personality disorder driving him to thrive on attention and conflict. No one can honestly say that led to anywhere good. Perhaps that's why on social media there was a great deal of skepticism of demands for more press conferences featuring Biden instead of his wholly competent (yet also boring) press secretary, Jen Psaki. Many folks — including many journalists — appeared to believe that the press is less interested in asking Biden substantive questions, and more interested in trying to corner him with fatuous bait about Dr. Seuss or Mr. Potato Head or "cancel culture" or whatever other trollish inanities are being favored by the Fox News crowd these days.
And sure enough, Mike Allen of Axios proved the point by complaining on CNN that Biden was keeping his nose out of the ongoing controversy around Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York, who has been accused of sexual harassment by multiple women.
To be certain, sexual harassment is a serious issue. However, New York Democrats are doing just fine calling for Cuomo's resignation on their own. It's clear that Allen is less interested in Biden's opinion out of a noble desire to end the scourge of sexual harassment and more out of a salacious desire to stoke intra-party conflict among Democrats. It's worth remembering that reporters let Republicans slide for years in their support for Trump, who is on tape bragging about sexual assault, mostly because it was understood that Republicans would stay united behind the belief that sexual abuse is no big deal. As media critic Eric Boehlert noted in the Monday edition of his newsletter, the press is "creating conflict and controversy where none exists," to the point of absurdity with stories about Biden like when "the New York Times dinged him for being out of touch with voters because of the expensive watch he wears, and the exercise bicycle he uses" while workers were still cleaning up damage to the Capitol from Trump's insurrection.
One person who very much agrees with the mainstream journalists complaining about Biden's terminal boringness is Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Tx., who shared a meme on Twitter over the weekend describing the president as "boring but radical." Radical, of course, is the conservative code word for any Democratic policy that is actually enacted, no matter how mainstream or uncontroversial. Which are two words that perfectly encapsulate Biden's recently passed American Rescue Plan, which polls show ranges from 61% to nearly 70% approval with voters. But mostly this was Cruz, like the mainstream journalists he claims to oppose so much, trying to bait Biden into being a little less of a boring bureaucrat.
Cruz, of course, is very much the opposite of Biden. He loves trolling for attention and getting into petty culture war fights, but doesn't so much like doing the actual job of governing, which is why he didn't think twice about abandoning Texas for a Cancun vacation during the winter storm crisis last month. Cruz tried to slot the Cancun story into the "inane bullshit" category, even though there were legitimate policy concerns around his global warming denialism and his support of deregulation, which contributed to the crisis. But his whining about Biden being "boring" exposed the reality, which is that Cruz — and Republicans in general — are the ones who benefit when the media focuses on silly non-controversies, instead of on important-but-boring policy concerns.
Republicans know full well they lose any debate that's focused on actual policy, which is why the party didn't even bother to have a platform during the 2020 election. So Republicans are desperate to make the topic du jour about anything but policy, grasping desperately at Potato Heads and Dr. Seuss, so they don't have to talk about their opposition to efforts to end the pandemic and restore the American economy.
Biden's refusal to take the bait helps cut off oxygen to such bullshit.
The Dr. Seuss story, for instance, is already running out of steam because Biden isn't on hand to give quotes for Fox News to pretend to be offended by. Republicans are nothing but trolls these days. There are plenty of people on hand who can handle the fake outrage about children's toys and "cancel culture" without wasting Biden's time. For his purpose, Biden's smartest move when dealing with trolls is not to feed them.
To be certain, the idea that the president should do more press conferences sounds good and reasonable in the abstract. In our current climate, however, there's a serious need for everyone — politicians, pundits, journalists, even news consumers — to detox after years of Trump's roller coaster of manufactured drama.
Trump turned governing into a reality TV show akin to "The Apprentice." Turning it back into a real government may just depend on Biden's ability to stop feeding the beast. There is no reason to think Biden will hold out on press conferences forever, but by keeping them lean and mean, he can hopefully train the press to focus on issues that matter instead of wasting everyone's time with "gotchas" and right wing-generated nonsense.
How Biden Is Succeeding Where Trump Failed
‘It’s an act of war’: Trump’s acting Pentagon chief urges Biden to tackle directed-energy attacks
“If this plays out and somebody is attacking Americans [even] with a nonlethal weapon … we owe it to our folks that are out there,” said Christopher Miller
By LARA SELIGMAN and ANDREW DESIDERIO
05/03/2021 04:12 PM EDT
www.google.com
The suspected directed-energy attacks on U.S. government personnel worldwide are “an act of war,” said former acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller, who launched an initiative to investigate the incidents during his time at the Pentagon last year and is urging the new administration to stay on the issue.
“If this plays out and somebody is attacking Americans [even] with a nonlethal weapon … we owe it to our folks that are out there,” Miller, who served as former President Donald Trump’s acting defense chief from November until January, told POLITICO. “We owe it to them to get to the bottom of this.”
Miller’s comments come as U.S. officials increasingly sound the alarm about the suspected attacks, which cause symptoms similar to those reported in recent years by American spies and diplomats in Cuba affected by the so-called “Havana syndrome.” Victims report lasting headaches, loss of hearing and balance, ringing and pressure in the ears, fatigue, and sometimes long-term brain damage.
POLITICO first reported that Pentagon officials last month briefed lawmakers on the “urgent” and growing threat to U.S. government personnel, including troops. The Senate Intelligence Committee has since vowed to “get to the bottom” of the issue.
The suspected attacks also include ongoing incidents involving military attaches at embassies around the world, a former official and a congressional source briefed on the incidents told POLITICO. Officials are focusing their investigations on suspected incidents near U.S. embassies in South America, the congressional source said.
This suspected attack, which has not been previously reported, joins a growing list of incidents. Others have allegedly occurred in the U.S., including in Miami, Alexandria, Va., and the Ellipse in Washington. Both sources asked not to be named in order to discuss the investigation.
Defense officials who briefed lawmakers last month said Russia was likely the source of the attacks, but did not have a smoking gun.
A White House spokesperson declined to comment on the specifics of the investigation, but said the Biden administration has taken the reports “very seriously since day one.”
“The investigation into the cause and culprit of the unexplained incidents is ongoing and a top priority for the Biden administration,” said the spokesperson, noting that the White House is coordinating the effort with departments and agencies across the federal government, as well as with experts in academia and the medical community.
“This concerns the health and well-being of American public servants from across the government, and we will continue to act with urgency to bring a whole of government response to these issues," said the person, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive issue.
A Defense Department spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.
Miller established an effort to investigate the incidents late last year. Shortly after he assumed the role of acting defense secretary in November, he met a Defense Department official who was seeking medical treatment for a mysterious attack that left him temporarily incapacitated.
As soon as the official described his symptoms, Miller knew right away that they had been caused by a directed-energy weapon.
“He wasn’t a histrionic-type person, so when he described the attack it was like, ‘yeah, you got hit with this weapon,” Miller said. “There was no way to deny it.” CNN first reported the interaction between the two.
The goal of the effort was “to create a bureaucratic momentum to get the interagency to take this more seriously,” Miller said.
Now, Miller said he is “gratified” to see that the Biden team is keeping it in focus. The CIA recently launched a task force of its own to look into the issue, and CIA Director William Burns told senators during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee that getting to the bottom of the Havana attacks was a top priority.
In a statement on Friday, Sens. Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), the chair and vice chair of the Intelligence Committee, said they welcomed Burns’ “renewed focus” on the matter and said they will continue to investigate.
“This pattern of attacking our fellow citizens serving our government appears to be increasing,” Warner and Rubio said. “The Senate Intelligence Committee intends to get to the bottom of this.”
Representatives for the Senate and House intelligence committees declined to comment further.
Doctors and scientists say the Havana attacks, which started in 2016, may have been caused by microwave weapons, which use a form of electromagnetic radiation to damage targets. While U.S. officials have not publicly blamed Russia for the events, Moscow is known to have worked on microwave weapons technology.
Simone Ledeen, a former Pentagon official overseeing Middle East policy under Trump who worked on directed-energy attacks in a previous position at DoD, also called on the new administration to continue looking into the incidents.
“This was one of the missions that absolutely needed to continue,” Ledeen said. “I hope the new team picks this up — it is actually very important as Americans are clearly being targeted.”
Former acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller established an effort to investigate the incidents late last year.
“If this plays out and somebody is attacking Americans [even] with a nonlethal weapon … we owe it to our folks that are out there,” said Christopher Miller
By LARA SELIGMAN and ANDREW DESIDERIO
05/03/2021 04:12 PM EDT
‘It’s an act of war’: Trump’s acting Pentagon chief urges Biden to tackle directed-energy attacks
“If this plays out and somebody is attacking Americans [even] with a nonlethal weapon … we owe it to our folks that are out there,” said Christopher Miller.
www.google.com
The suspected directed-energy attacks on U.S. government personnel worldwide are “an act of war,” said former acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller, who launched an initiative to investigate the incidents during his time at the Pentagon last year and is urging the new administration to stay on the issue.
“If this plays out and somebody is attacking Americans [even] with a nonlethal weapon … we owe it to our folks that are out there,” Miller, who served as former President Donald Trump’s acting defense chief from November until January, told POLITICO. “We owe it to them to get to the bottom of this.”
Miller’s comments come as U.S. officials increasingly sound the alarm about the suspected attacks, which cause symptoms similar to those reported in recent years by American spies and diplomats in Cuba affected by the so-called “Havana syndrome.” Victims report lasting headaches, loss of hearing and balance, ringing and pressure in the ears, fatigue, and sometimes long-term brain damage.
POLITICO first reported that Pentagon officials last month briefed lawmakers on the “urgent” and growing threat to U.S. government personnel, including troops. The Senate Intelligence Committee has since vowed to “get to the bottom” of the issue.
The suspected attacks also include ongoing incidents involving military attaches at embassies around the world, a former official and a congressional source briefed on the incidents told POLITICO. Officials are focusing their investigations on suspected incidents near U.S. embassies in South America, the congressional source said.
This suspected attack, which has not been previously reported, joins a growing list of incidents. Others have allegedly occurred in the U.S., including in Miami, Alexandria, Va., and the Ellipse in Washington. Both sources asked not to be named in order to discuss the investigation.
Defense officials who briefed lawmakers last month said Russia was likely the source of the attacks, but did not have a smoking gun.
A White House spokesperson declined to comment on the specifics of the investigation, but said the Biden administration has taken the reports “very seriously since day one.”
“The investigation into the cause and culprit of the unexplained incidents is ongoing and a top priority for the Biden administration,” said the spokesperson, noting that the White House is coordinating the effort with departments and agencies across the federal government, as well as with experts in academia and the medical community.
“This concerns the health and well-being of American public servants from across the government, and we will continue to act with urgency to bring a whole of government response to these issues," said the person, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive issue.
A Defense Department spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.
Miller established an effort to investigate the incidents late last year. Shortly after he assumed the role of acting defense secretary in November, he met a Defense Department official who was seeking medical treatment for a mysterious attack that left him temporarily incapacitated.
As soon as the official described his symptoms, Miller knew right away that they had been caused by a directed-energy weapon.
“He wasn’t a histrionic-type person, so when he described the attack it was like, ‘yeah, you got hit with this weapon,” Miller said. “There was no way to deny it.” CNN first reported the interaction between the two.
The goal of the effort was “to create a bureaucratic momentum to get the interagency to take this more seriously,” Miller said.
Now, Miller said he is “gratified” to see that the Biden team is keeping it in focus. The CIA recently launched a task force of its own to look into the issue, and CIA Director William Burns told senators during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee that getting to the bottom of the Havana attacks was a top priority.
In a statement on Friday, Sens. Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), the chair and vice chair of the Intelligence Committee, said they welcomed Burns’ “renewed focus” on the matter and said they will continue to investigate.
“This pattern of attacking our fellow citizens serving our government appears to be increasing,” Warner and Rubio said. “The Senate Intelligence Committee intends to get to the bottom of this.”
Representatives for the Senate and House intelligence committees declined to comment further.
Doctors and scientists say the Havana attacks, which started in 2016, may have been caused by microwave weapons, which use a form of electromagnetic radiation to damage targets. While U.S. officials have not publicly blamed Russia for the events, Moscow is known to have worked on microwave weapons technology.
Simone Ledeen, a former Pentagon official overseeing Middle East policy under Trump who worked on directed-energy attacks in a previous position at DoD, also called on the new administration to continue looking into the incidents.
“This was one of the missions that absolutely needed to continue,” Ledeen said. “I hope the new team picks this up — it is actually very important as Americans are clearly being targeted.”
Former acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller established an effort to investigate the incidents late last year.
Many lower- and middle-earning households may pay nothing in income taxes this year
Sarah O'Brien
April 27, 2021
www.google.com
A large swath of American households may pay nothing in income taxes for 2021, a new congressional report suggests.
Taxpayers with income of less than $75,000 are projected to have, on average, no tax liability after deductions and credits when they file their 2021 returns next spring. They will also will get money back from the IRS, according to recent estimates from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation.
For taxpayers earning $75,000 to $100,000, the average income tax rate paid this year is expected to be just 1.8%.
"The main drivers for nonpayers are the [earned income tax credit] for lower earners and the child tax credit for families with children after accounting for the standard deduction," said Garrett Watson, a senior policy analyst at the Tax Foundation.
While having a zero tax bill is not a new phenomenon, it may be more pronounced this year due to a variety of temporary tax code changes, said Elaine Maag, principal research associate in the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.
In addition to the $1,400 stimulus checks per adult and dependent that were authorized in the American Rescue Plan, several tax credits were expanded. They include the earned income tax credit and the child tax credit (see details below). Both credits are considered valuable, given that they are refundable — meaning that even if your tax bill is zero, you can get some or all of the credits refunded to you.
The congressional projections do not mean everyone earning less than $75,000 will pay nothing in taxes.
"There are plenty of people in that income group that will owe income taxes," Maag said. "Those are the averages for everyone."
Additionally, owing nothing to the IRS on your income doesn't mean paying zero federal taxes.
For example, if you earn money from a job (versus from, say, investments), you pay taxes into Social Security and Medicare. Those so-called payroll taxes equate to 7.65%, which your employer withholds from your paycheck (and contributes the same amount — 7.65% — to those programs on your behalf).
If you are self-employed, you pay both shares yourself, or 15.3% (although you can deduct half of that elsewhere on your tax return).
About 53% of Americans had an annual household income of less than $75,000 in 2019, according to the latest data from Statista. Median household income in the U.S. that year was about $68,700, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
"The group not paying federal income taxes in any given year tend to be moderate income with children, as well as older people, who may not have earnings that they are paying tax on," Maag said.
President Joe Biden's next move to change individual taxes is expected to target higher-earning households. That could come in the form of increasing the top marginal income tax rate to 39.6% from the current 37% and changing the top capital gains tax rate to 39.6%, as well, from 20%.
As for details of the credits: The child tax credit is enhanced for 2021 in several ways, including by raising the per-child payment to $3,000 from $2,000 for families with income below certain thresholds (phase-outs begin at $75,000 for singles, $112,500 for heads of household and $150,000 for married couples), with an extra $600 for children under age 6. Children age 17 also qualify for the first time.
Those child tax credits will be advanced via direct payments beginning in July.
The earned income tax credit for childless workers also has been expanded by boosting the maximum credit in 2021 for that cohort to $1,502 from $543, research from the Tax Foundation shows. The benefit would be realized when taxpayers file their 2021 returns in spring 2022.
The bill also raises the income level (to $9,820 from $4,220) at which the earned income tax credit reaches its maximum, and changes the phaseout to begin at $11,610 instead of $5,280 for individual tax filers. The ages for qualifying for the credit also is changed for this year: The minimum age is 19 instead of 24 and the maximum age of 65 would be eliminated.
Click Above Link To View Charts
Sarah O'Brien
April 27, 2021
Many lower- and middle-earning households may pay nothing in income taxes this year
Taxpayers with income under $75,000 are projected to have no tax liability after deductions and credits for 2021, according to a congressional report.
A large swath of American households may pay nothing in income taxes for 2021, a new congressional report suggests.
Taxpayers with income of less than $75,000 are projected to have, on average, no tax liability after deductions and credits when they file their 2021 returns next spring. They will also will get money back from the IRS, according to recent estimates from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation.
For taxpayers earning $75,000 to $100,000, the average income tax rate paid this year is expected to be just 1.8%.
"The main drivers for nonpayers are the [earned income tax credit] for lower earners and the child tax credit for families with children after accounting for the standard deduction," said Garrett Watson, a senior policy analyst at the Tax Foundation.
While having a zero tax bill is not a new phenomenon, it may be more pronounced this year due to a variety of temporary tax code changes, said Elaine Maag, principal research associate in the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.
In addition to the $1,400 stimulus checks per adult and dependent that were authorized in the American Rescue Plan, several tax credits were expanded. They include the earned income tax credit and the child tax credit (see details below). Both credits are considered valuable, given that they are refundable — meaning that even if your tax bill is zero, you can get some or all of the credits refunded to you.
The congressional projections do not mean everyone earning less than $75,000 will pay nothing in taxes.
"There are plenty of people in that income group that will owe income taxes," Maag said. "Those are the averages for everyone."
Additionally, owing nothing to the IRS on your income doesn't mean paying zero federal taxes.
For example, if you earn money from a job (versus from, say, investments), you pay taxes into Social Security and Medicare. Those so-called payroll taxes equate to 7.65%, which your employer withholds from your paycheck (and contributes the same amount — 7.65% — to those programs on your behalf).
If you are self-employed, you pay both shares yourself, or 15.3% (although you can deduct half of that elsewhere on your tax return).
About 53% of Americans had an annual household income of less than $75,000 in 2019, according to the latest data from Statista. Median household income in the U.S. that year was about $68,700, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
"The group not paying federal income taxes in any given year tend to be moderate income with children, as well as older people, who may not have earnings that they are paying tax on," Maag said.
President Joe Biden's next move to change individual taxes is expected to target higher-earning households. That could come in the form of increasing the top marginal income tax rate to 39.6% from the current 37% and changing the top capital gains tax rate to 39.6%, as well, from 20%.
As for details of the credits: The child tax credit is enhanced for 2021 in several ways, including by raising the per-child payment to $3,000 from $2,000 for families with income below certain thresholds (phase-outs begin at $75,000 for singles, $112,500 for heads of household and $150,000 for married couples), with an extra $600 for children under age 6. Children age 17 also qualify for the first time.
Those child tax credits will be advanced via direct payments beginning in July.
The earned income tax credit for childless workers also has been expanded by boosting the maximum credit in 2021 for that cohort to $1,502 from $543, research from the Tax Foundation shows. The benefit would be realized when taxpayers file their 2021 returns in spring 2022.
The bill also raises the income level (to $9,820 from $4,220) at which the earned income tax credit reaches its maximum, and changes the phaseout to begin at $11,610 instead of $5,280 for individual tax filers. The ages for qualifying for the credit also is changed for this year: The minimum age is 19 instead of 24 and the maximum age of 65 would be eliminated.
Click Above Link To View Charts
Damn
.Hadn't heard of directed energy-attacks, before.
Wiki says:
A directed-energy weapon (DEW) is a ranged weapon that damages its target with highly focused energy, including laser, microwaves, and particle beams. Potential applications of this technology include weapons that target personnel, missiles, vehicles, and optical devices.[1][2]
In the United States, the Pentagon, DARPA, the Air Force Research Laboratory, United States Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center, and the Naval Research Laboratory are researching directed-energy weapons and railguns to counter ballistic missiles, hypersonic cruise missiles, and hypersonic glide vehicles. These systems of missile defense are expected to come online no sooner than the mid to late-2020s.[3]
Russia,[4][5][6] China,[7][8][9][10] India[11][12][13] and the United Kingdom[14][15] are also developing directed-energy weapons while Iran[16][17][18][19] and Turkey claim to have directed-energy weapons in active service.[20][21][22] The first usage of directed-energy weapons in a combat was claimed to have occurred in Libya in August 2019 by Turkey, which claimed to use the ALKA Directed-energy weapon.[23][24]
After decades of research and development, directed-energy weapons are still at the experimental stage and it remains to be seen if or when they will be deployed as practical, high-performance military weapons.[25][26]
and more at: Directed-energy weapon - Wikipedia
Eddie Griffin
Too Many Jobs And Not Enough Workers
Too Many Jobs And Not Enough Workers
The real reasons for why Kevin McCarthy is afraid of a January 6 commission
(CNN)Days after a bipartisan agreement was reached in the House to form a commission to examine the roots and events of the January 6 riot at the US Capitol, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy announced Tuesday that he opposes the bill.
"Given the political misdirections that have marred this process, given the now duplicative and potentially counterproductive nature of this effort, and given the Speaker's shortsighted scope that does not examine interrelated forms of political violence in America, I cannot support this legislation," said McCarthy.
Which doesn't make any sense because, well, the legislation that would have created the commission was developed by Reps. Bennie Thompson (D-Mississippi) and John Katko (R-New York). And Katko had made clear that he was negotiating on behalf of and with the imprimatur of the Republican leadership.
So, what's really going on here? Why would McCarthy throw Katko directly under the bus -- sending a message to every rank and file Republican that the leadership has zero problem making you look like a fool if it behooves them?
Two reasons, actually.
1) McCarthy doesn't want to testify under oath about his phone conversation with former President Donald Trump on January 6. As CNN reported, Trump told McCarthy on that call that the rioters "are more upset about the election than you are" and the GOP leader responded by insisting that the people overrunning the Capitol were backers of the President and that he needed to tell them to stand down.
A week after the riot, here's what McCarthy said on the House floor about Trump and the riot:
"The President bears responsibility for Wednesday's attack on Congress by mob rioters. He should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding. These facts require immediate action of President Trump."
But, as it became increasingly clear that even Trump's role inciting these rioters would not turn the GOP base away from him, McCarthy changed his tune. In late April, in an interview on "Fox News Sunday," McCarthy said this about his January 6 call with Trump:
"What I talked to President Trump about, I was the first person to contact him when the riots was going on. He didn't see it. What he ended the call was saying -- telling me, he'll put something out to make sure to stop this. And that's what he did, he put a video out later."
That is, of course, fundamentally inaccurate. Trump waited hours before releasing any sort of statement about the riot. And, when he did call on the rioters to go home, he reiterated the Big Lie about the 2020 election. "We had an election that was stolen from us. It was a landslide election and everyone knows it," Trump said in a video released by the White House that day. "Especially the other side. But you have to go home now. We have to have peace."
The broader point here is that McCarthy has been VERY cagey about that January 6 phone call -- and there continues to be questions about whether Trump and McCarthy have spoken about the call since January 6.
"Leader McCarthy has spoken to a number of people in -- in large groups and small groups since the sixth about his exchanges with the President," said Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney (R) on "Fox News Sunday." "I think it's very important that, you know, he clearly has facts about that day, that an investigation into what happened, into the president's actions, ought to get to the bottom of. And I think that he has important information that needs to be part of any investigation, whether it's the FBI, the Department of Justice, or this commission that I -- I hope will be set up."
2) McCarthy wants to be speaker badly. Last week, McCarthy led the charge to remove Cheney as the third-ranking Republican in the House because she voted to impeach Trump for his role on January 6 -- and her outspoken belief that the former President should not play a central role in the party's future. His decision on the January 6 commission has to be seen in relation to that move, as both are based on this reality: The Republican base doesn't believe that Trump lost the election -- and is already seeking to rewrite the history of January 6.
McCarthy has drawn the conclusion that there is no path to the House majority in 2022 that doesn't run through total and complete support for Trump. And, selfishly, that the best way for him to ensure that he will be the choice for speaker if and when Republicans win the majority is to stand in total opposition to anything that tries to put blame for January 6 insurrection on Trump.
Combine those two factors and you see why McCarthy was willing to totally and publicly undermine Katko in support of both his personal and political ambitions. It's transparent, yes. But McCarthy is playing hardball to keep his political career on track.
I know some people have tired to justify Manchin as a "team player", but if he won't come through when he's needed, then what damn good is he?
Manchin is just sucking up his 15 minutes of fame in the limelight
Prior to January 20th, nobody knew he existed or gave two fucks about him.
If the Democrats right now managed to remove or alter the filibuster to get shit passed in the Senate.
Or if by chance the Democrats somehow got 2 New Democratic Senators as a result of 2 GOP Senators forced to resign who have a Democratic Governor above them.
Joe Manchin and that silly headed Senema will disappear out of existence like a distant memory.
Liberals to Biden: Ditch the infrastructure talks with Republicans
Rep. Mark Pocan called the GOP’s latest counteroffer “ridiculous” and said the Republicans might as well have proposed paying for it with a “bake sale."
By BURGESS EVERETT and SARAH FERRIS
05/19/2021 04:30 AM EDT
Updated: 05/19/2021 07:36 AM EDT
www.google.com
Progressives are ready to pull the plug on President Joe Biden’s weeks of infrastructure negotiations with Republicans.
Liberal Democrats are speaking out at an awkward time, as Biden’s Cabinet officials held their latest talks with Senate Republicans on Tuesday, but many of them have already moved on from the White House’s efforts at bipartisanship. These Democrats say they're worried that by cutting a deal with the GOP on roads and bridges, they risk losing out on a generational opportunity to expand paid family leave and child tax credits and invest in green energy.
Asked if the Biden administration should keep talking to Republicans about a bipartisan infrastructure deal, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) replied: “Absolutely not. Because we might lose our coalition for human infrastructure.” Instead she's “100 percent” in favor of pushing through a multitrillion-dollar package using the blunt partisan mechanism of budget reconciliation.
“I do not think that the White House should relegate recovery to the judgment of Mitch McConnell, because he will not function in good faith,” said Gillibrand, who made her case recently to Bruce Reed, Biden’s deputy chief of staff. “So, I just think it's a terrible political misstep.”
House progressives sent their own warning shot Tuesday to Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, arguing in a letter that Democrats should pursue a multitrillion-dollar megabill sweeping Biden’s priorities together, “a single, ambitious package combining physical and social investments hand in hand.” It’s the strongest sign yet that a growing number of liberals are done with trying to cut an infrastructure deal with Republicans that costs $800 billion at most and kicks other priorities down the road.
"They're not being even players and we should just move on without them," said Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), one of roughly 60 House liberals who signed the letter. He dismissed the GOP’s $800 billion plan as a “counting gimmick” rather than a serious proposal: “Time to pull the trigger.”
Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), another senior progressive, called the GOP’s latest counteroffer “ridiculous” and said the Republican list of proposals to pay for it might as well have included a “bake sale” to help raise funds.
“At what point do they seriously come to the table?” Pocan said, noting that Republicans could still back the Democrats’ effort when it comes to the floor. “If they don’t come to the table, it doesn’t mean we don’t serve the meal.”
If Tuesday was any indication, Biden and Republicans are miles away from a deal. During a meeting at the Capitol between a half-dozen GOP senators, Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, the two sides discussed the basics of how to pay for a bill but didn't settle on a topline number or other basic elements of the bipartisan negotiation. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) cited progress but observed: "We still got a ways to go."
Andrew Bates, a spokesman for Biden, said Biden "wants to see progress by Memorial Day" and that inaction is not an option.
“The president is committed to investing in our middle class and our infrastructure, and is working with both parties — reaching across the aisle in good faith — to negotiate about achieving that," Bates said.
At the moment, however, liberals’ preference to leave the GOP behind is limited by their own party’s narrow majorities. Senate Democrats don’t quite have the votes to move forward with their own, unilateral approach the way they did in March with the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said one gargantuan reconciliation bill “would be quicker and easier, but we don’t seem to have the votes for it.”
For now, Schumer and Pelosi are staying publicly in sync with Biden’s bipartisan hopes, and the Senate leader is even advancing through a bipartisan competitiveness bill to show he’s serious. But that may change, bringing along centrists like Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), if talks between the Biden administration and the Republicans collapse.
And Democratic leaders are preparing contingency plans for if that does happen.
“We ought to have a timely negotiation with the Republicans, but be prepared to go to reconciliation if we must,” said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.).
In the House, liberals say they fully expect Pelosi and Schumer will eventually have to ditch the negotiating table to craft a broader package without the GOP. Many have said privately for months that there was no chance Republicans would come on board — because of the price tag, but also the GOP’s eagerness to block the Democrats’ entire agenda for political gains.
Patience has begun to run thin among many progressives, particularly as many of their GOP counterparts refuse to say that Biden fairly won the election and oust a member of their House leadership team amid rising personal tensions. What’s more, Republicans have offered an infrastructure deal that liberals view as anemic: Less than $1 trillion paid for with unspent coronavirus aid, expanded tax enforcement and public-private partnerships.
“It’s not $800 billion compared to $2.3 billion,” said Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), arguing that the GOP’s version is inflated because it counts existing spending. The California Democrat said he’s willing to wait out Biden’s negotiations with the GOP, but just for a few more weeks.
“I think we should move forward with our bill,” Khanna said.
Many House Democrats say they expect talks on a party-line bill to intensify by June, when lawmakers return from a three-week work period. They believe formal GOP talks will have fizzled out by then, paving the way for their leadership to put its budget on the floor and formally start the clock for a Democrats-only reconciliation bill. Pelosi has said she hopes to bring a bill to the floor by the July 4 holiday weekend.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Tuesday that Democratic committees will spend next week working on their pieces of Biden’s bill “so that they can be ready to move ahead on — in whatever way we decide."
Liberal groups, meanwhile, are making clear where they want their party to turn on the big weighty economic issues of the day: away from the Republicans. Ezra Levin, a co-founder of Indivisible, said the best-case scenario is that Biden's party gets "a few GOP votes for things the Democrats could have just passed on their own. Worst-case scenario, the GOP successfully wastes enough time to scuttle the whole effort.”
“The only two scenarios for Democrats are to go big or get nothing,” said Adam Green, a co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.
Several liberal Democrats also argue that GOP leaders are proving themselves to be unreliable negotiators. They point to McCarthy’s attempt to fundraise off a recent White House meeting, urging donors to help him block the “radical Democrat agenda from destroying our country” just minutes before sitting down with Biden. Then there was the vow by Senate minority leader McConnell to spend “100 percent” of his focus “standing up to the administration.”
Some on the left contend that the GOP talks could be productive, arguing that a bipartisan bill would be simpler — since it wouldn’t require squeezing a bill through the Senate restrictive budget rules — even if it’s not everything Democrats want. Those liberals say it makes little sense for Democrats to pass something in the House that can’t survive the Senate.
“I could make an argument that you need to do it all together,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). “And I could also make an argument that you might make it easier to do those things if you get a good bipartisan package.”
In the end, even if Biden consummates a deal with Republicans on a bill boosting physical infrastructure, Democrats will want a road map to what's next. Leaving behind the president's proposed multitrillion-dollar investment in the social programs they call “human infrastructure” is simply not an option for most progressives.
“I know all of the reasons why a sweeping, huge $4 trillion package would not be possible,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). “So I would certainly support a different plan. As long as there is a plan.”
Rep. Mark Pocan called the GOP’s latest counteroffer “ridiculous” and said the Republicans might as well have proposed paying for it with a “bake sale."
By BURGESS EVERETT and SARAH FERRIS
05/19/2021 04:30 AM EDT
Updated: 05/19/2021 07:36 AM EDT
Liberals to Biden: Ditch the infrastructure talks with Republicans
Rep. Mark Pocan called the GOP’s latest counteroffer “ridiculous” and said the Republicans might as well have proposed paying for it with a “bake sale."
www.google.com
Progressives are ready to pull the plug on President Joe Biden’s weeks of infrastructure negotiations with Republicans.
Liberal Democrats are speaking out at an awkward time, as Biden’s Cabinet officials held their latest talks with Senate Republicans on Tuesday, but many of them have already moved on from the White House’s efforts at bipartisanship. These Democrats say they're worried that by cutting a deal with the GOP on roads and bridges, they risk losing out on a generational opportunity to expand paid family leave and child tax credits and invest in green energy.
Asked if the Biden administration should keep talking to Republicans about a bipartisan infrastructure deal, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) replied: “Absolutely not. Because we might lose our coalition for human infrastructure.” Instead she's “100 percent” in favor of pushing through a multitrillion-dollar package using the blunt partisan mechanism of budget reconciliation.
“I do not think that the White House should relegate recovery to the judgment of Mitch McConnell, because he will not function in good faith,” said Gillibrand, who made her case recently to Bruce Reed, Biden’s deputy chief of staff. “So, I just think it's a terrible political misstep.”
House progressives sent their own warning shot Tuesday to Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, arguing in a letter that Democrats should pursue a multitrillion-dollar megabill sweeping Biden’s priorities together, “a single, ambitious package combining physical and social investments hand in hand.” It’s the strongest sign yet that a growing number of liberals are done with trying to cut an infrastructure deal with Republicans that costs $800 billion at most and kicks other priorities down the road.
"They're not being even players and we should just move on without them," said Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), one of roughly 60 House liberals who signed the letter. He dismissed the GOP’s $800 billion plan as a “counting gimmick” rather than a serious proposal: “Time to pull the trigger.”
Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), another senior progressive, called the GOP’s latest counteroffer “ridiculous” and said the Republican list of proposals to pay for it might as well have included a “bake sale” to help raise funds.
“At what point do they seriously come to the table?” Pocan said, noting that Republicans could still back the Democrats’ effort when it comes to the floor. “If they don’t come to the table, it doesn’t mean we don’t serve the meal.”
If Tuesday was any indication, Biden and Republicans are miles away from a deal. During a meeting at the Capitol between a half-dozen GOP senators, Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, the two sides discussed the basics of how to pay for a bill but didn't settle on a topline number or other basic elements of the bipartisan negotiation. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) cited progress but observed: "We still got a ways to go."
Andrew Bates, a spokesman for Biden, said Biden "wants to see progress by Memorial Day" and that inaction is not an option.
“The president is committed to investing in our middle class and our infrastructure, and is working with both parties — reaching across the aisle in good faith — to negotiate about achieving that," Bates said.
At the moment, however, liberals’ preference to leave the GOP behind is limited by their own party’s narrow majorities. Senate Democrats don’t quite have the votes to move forward with their own, unilateral approach the way they did in March with the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said one gargantuan reconciliation bill “would be quicker and easier, but we don’t seem to have the votes for it.”
For now, Schumer and Pelosi are staying publicly in sync with Biden’s bipartisan hopes, and the Senate leader is even advancing through a bipartisan competitiveness bill to show he’s serious. But that may change, bringing along centrists like Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), if talks between the Biden administration and the Republicans collapse.
And Democratic leaders are preparing contingency plans for if that does happen.
“We ought to have a timely negotiation with the Republicans, but be prepared to go to reconciliation if we must,” said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.).
In the House, liberals say they fully expect Pelosi and Schumer will eventually have to ditch the negotiating table to craft a broader package without the GOP. Many have said privately for months that there was no chance Republicans would come on board — because of the price tag, but also the GOP’s eagerness to block the Democrats’ entire agenda for political gains.
Patience has begun to run thin among many progressives, particularly as many of their GOP counterparts refuse to say that Biden fairly won the election and oust a member of their House leadership team amid rising personal tensions. What’s more, Republicans have offered an infrastructure deal that liberals view as anemic: Less than $1 trillion paid for with unspent coronavirus aid, expanded tax enforcement and public-private partnerships.
“It’s not $800 billion compared to $2.3 billion,” said Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), arguing that the GOP’s version is inflated because it counts existing spending. The California Democrat said he’s willing to wait out Biden’s negotiations with the GOP, but just for a few more weeks.
“I think we should move forward with our bill,” Khanna said.
Many House Democrats say they expect talks on a party-line bill to intensify by June, when lawmakers return from a three-week work period. They believe formal GOP talks will have fizzled out by then, paving the way for their leadership to put its budget on the floor and formally start the clock for a Democrats-only reconciliation bill. Pelosi has said she hopes to bring a bill to the floor by the July 4 holiday weekend.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Tuesday that Democratic committees will spend next week working on their pieces of Biden’s bill “so that they can be ready to move ahead on — in whatever way we decide."
Liberal groups, meanwhile, are making clear where they want their party to turn on the big weighty economic issues of the day: away from the Republicans. Ezra Levin, a co-founder of Indivisible, said the best-case scenario is that Biden's party gets "a few GOP votes for things the Democrats could have just passed on their own. Worst-case scenario, the GOP successfully wastes enough time to scuttle the whole effort.”
“The only two scenarios for Democrats are to go big or get nothing,” said Adam Green, a co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.
Several liberal Democrats also argue that GOP leaders are proving themselves to be unreliable negotiators. They point to McCarthy’s attempt to fundraise off a recent White House meeting, urging donors to help him block the “radical Democrat agenda from destroying our country” just minutes before sitting down with Biden. Then there was the vow by Senate minority leader McConnell to spend “100 percent” of his focus “standing up to the administration.”
Some on the left contend that the GOP talks could be productive, arguing that a bipartisan bill would be simpler — since it wouldn’t require squeezing a bill through the Senate restrictive budget rules — even if it’s not everything Democrats want. Those liberals say it makes little sense for Democrats to pass something in the House that can’t survive the Senate.
“I could make an argument that you need to do it all together,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). “And I could also make an argument that you might make it easier to do those things if you get a good bipartisan package.”
In the end, even if Biden consummates a deal with Republicans on a bill boosting physical infrastructure, Democrats will want a road map to what's next. Leaving behind the president's proposed multitrillion-dollar investment in the social programs they call “human infrastructure” is simply not an option for most progressives.
“I know all of the reasons why a sweeping, huge $4 trillion package would not be possible,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). “So I would certainly support a different plan. As long as there is a plan.”
‘It’s an act of war’: Trump’s acting Pentagon chief urges Biden to tackle directed-energy attacks
“If this plays out and somebody is attacking Americans [even] with a nonlethal weapon … we owe it to our folks that are out there,” said Christopher Miller
By LARA SELIGMAN and ANDREW DESIDERIO
05/03/2021 04:12 PM EDT
‘It’s an act of war’: Trump’s acting Pentagon chief urges Biden to tackle directed-energy attacks
“If this plays out and somebody is attacking Americans [even] with a nonlethal weapon … we owe it to our folks that are out there,” said Christopher Miller.
The suspected directed-energy attacks on U.S. government personnel worldwide are “an act of war,” said former acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller, who launched an initiative to investigate the incidents during his time at the Pentagon last year and is urging the new administration to stay on the issue.
“If this plays out and somebody is attacking Americans [even] with a nonlethal weapon … we owe it to our folks that are out there,” Miller, who served as former President Donald Trump’s acting defense chief from November until January, told POLITICO. “We owe it to them to get to the bottom of this.”
Miller’s comments come as U.S. officials increasingly sound the alarm about the suspected attacks, which cause symptoms similar to those reported in recent years by American spies and diplomats in Cuba affected by the so-called “Havana syndrome.” Victims report lasting headaches, loss of hearing and balance, ringing and pressure in the ears, fatigue, and sometimes long-term brain damage.
POLITICO first reported that Pentagon officials last month briefed lawmakers on the “urgent” and growing threat to U.S. government personnel, including troops. The Senate Intelligence Committee has since vowed to “get to the bottom” of the issue.
The suspected attacks also include ongoing incidents involving military attaches at embassies around the world, a former official and a congressional source briefed on the incidents told POLITICO. Officials are focusing their investigations on suspected incidents near U.S. embassies in South America, the congressional source said.
This suspected attack, which has not been previously reported, joins a growing list of incidents. Others have allegedly occurred in the U.S., including in Miami, Alexandria, Va., and the Ellipse in Washington. Both sources asked not to be named in order to discuss the investigation.
Defense officials who briefed lawmakers last month said Russia was likely the source of the attacks, but did not have a smoking gun.
A White House spokesperson declined to comment on the specifics of the investigation, but said the Biden administration has taken the reports “very seriously since day one.”
“The investigation into the cause and culprit of the unexplained incidents is ongoing and a top priority for the Biden administration,” said the spokesperson, noting that the White House is coordinating the effort with departments and agencies across the federal government, as well as with experts in academia and the medical community.
“This concerns the health and well-being of American public servants from across the government, and we will continue to act with urgency to bring a whole of government response to these issues," said the person, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive issue.
A Defense Department spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.
Miller established an effort to investigate the incidents late last year. Shortly after he assumed the role of acting defense secretary in November, he met a Defense Department official who was seeking medical treatment for a mysterious attack that left him temporarily incapacitated.
As soon as the official described his symptoms, Miller knew right away that they had been caused by a directed-energy weapon.
“He wasn’t a histrionic-type person, so when he described the attack it was like, ‘yeah, you got hit with this weapon,” Miller said. “There was no way to deny it.” CNN first reported the interaction between the two.
The goal of the effort was “to create a bureaucratic momentum to get the interagency to take this more seriously,” Miller said.
Now, Miller said he is “gratified” to see that the Biden team is keeping it in focus. The CIA recently launched a task force of its own to look into the issue, and CIA Director William Burns told senators during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee that getting to the bottom of the Havana attacks was a top priority.
In a statement on Friday, Sens. Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), the chair and vice chair of the Intelligence Committee, said they welcomed Burns’ “renewed focus” on the matter and said they will continue to investigate.
“This pattern of attacking our fellow citizens serving our government appears to be increasing,” Warner and Rubio said. “The Senate Intelligence Committee intends to get to the bottom of this.”
Representatives for the Senate and House intelligence committees declined to comment further.
Doctors and scientists say the Havana attacks, which started in 2016, may have been caused by microwave weapons, which use a form of electromagnetic radiation to damage targets. While U.S. officials have not publicly blamed Russia for the events, Moscow is known to have worked on microwave weapons technology.
Simone Ledeen, a former Pentagon official overseeing Middle East policy under Trump who worked on directed-energy attacks in a previous position at DoD, also called on the new administration to continue looking into the incidents.
“This was one of the missions that absolutely needed to continue,” Ledeen said. “I hope the new team picks this up — it is actually very important as Americans are clearly being targeted.”
Former acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller established an effort to investigate the incidents late last year.
There is no way somebody can come into Washington DC and use some weapon like, it is one of the most heavily surveilled cities in the U.S., far exceeding what they are doing in Russia or China.
Nobody can come into Washington DC and Storm and Siege and Occupy the US Capitol because it’s heavily secured..........
If some country possessed this type technology, it is more powerful than a nuclear weapon, the ability to permanently injure political leadership covertly. These attacks overseas are similar to Nagasaki and Hiroshima where they are making a country aware of their newfound technology.
They are testing it out and observing the U.S. investigative efforts before deploying mainland. It was a mistake to make attempts to detect the weapon, in a hostile environment where they can observe you.
It is no different than a nuclear weapons tests. The U.S. will need to change its foreign/military policy into a passive/neutral role similar to Japan.
Last edited:
This affects the rest of the world, the U.S. is about to flood the earth with these low earth orbiting satellites that will flood space with junk to bring the internet to these vax and covid deniers in rural areas. Many of the places have electrical lines yet ISP won't pay to bring the internet to these areas for government surveillance.
I watched one guy pay serious money to have a fiber optic cable laid down to his house. The government could quickly remedy this for many of these areas with 5G or other technologies.
I watched one guy pay serious money to have a fiber optic cable laid down to his house. The government could quickly remedy this for many of these areas with 5G or other technologies.
As I am unable to do any substantive work due to my slavery detainment and intrusive surveillance violating my human rights, I'm forced to ponder other issues that are inconsequential to keep my brain occupied.
We should be doing the opposite of this long-term plan to steer us into our demise, similar to Tulsa, Oklahoma. You might see other states with less restrictive voting laws but they routinely pick one political party every year and it is predominantly white. Bringing that model to the south or places with a large illegal immigrant population would be foolhardy since the population is mixed demographically.
It is states that are long term strongholds for a political party that switch that draw suspicion to us. We need to have strong data backing up this political swing and the appearance of a secure election.
Why was voting rights taken away in the South after the Civil War forcing the civil rights movement to claw this ability back? We would see any attempt to establish a reasonable secure election as a poll tax, similar to a veteran that hears a loud noise and thinks it is an enemy attack.
Putting ballot boxes sprawled out over a city with a black mayor was a set up designed to bait voting fraud similar to porch piracy. Even though it would make voting easier and safer to have ballot boxes all over the place as a mayor I would reject it immediately out of an abundance of caution to avoid the appearance or eliminate the temptation.
Just imagine what would have happened if Pres. Trump lost the election in 2016 and then it came out that Pres. Obama ordered surveillance on his campaign based on a discredited dossier? I believe he was baited into setting up an investigation then this discredited dossier was planted. This is another tactic that could be used against high-level black politicians. Now some retribution can take place that looks nonracial.
www.history.com
We should be doing the opposite of this long-term plan to steer us into our demise, similar to Tulsa, Oklahoma. You might see other states with less restrictive voting laws but they routinely pick one political party every year and it is predominantly white. Bringing that model to the south or places with a large illegal immigrant population would be foolhardy since the population is mixed demographically.
It is states that are long term strongholds for a political party that switch that draw suspicion to us. We need to have strong data backing up this political swing and the appearance of a secure election.
Why was voting rights taken away in the South after the Civil War forcing the civil rights movement to claw this ability back? We would see any attempt to establish a reasonable secure election as a poll tax, similar to a veteran that hears a loud noise and thinks it is an enemy attack.
Putting ballot boxes sprawled out over a city with a black mayor was a set up designed to bait voting fraud similar to porch piracy. Even though it would make voting easier and safer to have ballot boxes all over the place as a mayor I would reject it immediately out of an abundance of caution to avoid the appearance or eliminate the temptation.
Just imagine what would have happened if Pres. Trump lost the election in 2016 and then it came out that Pres. Obama ordered surveillance on his campaign based on a discredited dossier? I believe he was baited into setting up an investigation then this discredited dossier was planted. This is another tactic that could be used against high-level black politicians. Now some retribution can take place that looks nonracial.
When Did African Americans Actually Get the Right to Vote? | HISTORY
The 15th Amendment was supposed to guarantee Black men the right to vote, but exercising that right became another challenge.