Tag: GOP

Trump to GOP firms: Stop using my image or your clients will suffer

[ad_1]
“When you deceive the President’s donors and usurp his brand for your own profit, you drain him of the financial resources his campaign needs to defeat Joe Biden and Make America Great Again,” Wiles and LaCivita write in the letter.
The Trump campaign sent the letter to Tag Strategies, Red Spark Strategy, Prosper Group, IMGE, Go Big Media, Push Digital, Convergence Media, Coldspark, Axiom Strategies and Targeted Victory.
Several of the firms are working for prospective GOP rivals to Trump. Coldspark, for instance, is helping former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, who has announced her candidacy. Axiom is working with a super PAC aligned with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Targeted Victory is a vendor to South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott. Both DeSantis and Scott are seen as likely contenders. The firms also represent a host of other down-ballot candidates within the Republican Party who would stand to benefit from securing a Trump endorsement.
None of the firms who received the Trump campaign letter commented for this story.
Trump has made similar moves before. In March 2021, his lawyers sent cease-and-desist letters to the Republican National Committee, NRCC and National Republican Senatorial Committee, demanding they stop using his name and likeness in fundraising emails and merchandise. The RNC denied the cease-and-desist demand.
Thursday’s letter is not a legal threat so much as a political one, forcing the party’s main digital consultants to weigh the value of Trump’s endorsement versus the use of his name to raise funds for their clients.
“Going forward, in determining which candidates he will support, the President and his team will consider whether the candidate is paying a digital fundraising vendor that routinely fundraises off of his name, image and likeness without his authorization,” Wiles and LaCivita write. “It is highly unlikely that President Trump will endorse, sign letters for, appear at events with or post on social media about candidates who use such vendors, or invite such vendors’ clients to join him on stage or otherwise recognize them at his rallies and other events.”
[ad_2]
#Trump #GOP #firms #Stop #image #clients #suffer
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 24, 2023
House GOP infighting is threatening their ability to get bills out the door

[ad_1]

Senior Republicans say they ultimately have the votes to pass both the energy and education bills on the floor. But that’s only after an aggressive whip operation by McCarthy’s leadership team, including Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.), to assuage concerns about the flood of amendments.
That kind of last-minute scrambling to lock down votes is likely to be the norm for Republican leadership over the next two years, as the party fights to tether its disparate wings together on broad promises the GOP focused on in its push to reclaim the House majority. And none of it will be easy, given that the party has just four votes to spare on any measure coming to the floor — not to mention a Democratic caucus eager to exploit the fissures across the aisle.
Republicans’ worries are particularly acute when it comes to the education measure they have dubbed the “parents’ bill of rights.” A bloc of House moderates, for example, privately raised alarms about a proposed amendment to the education bill from Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) that would effectively gut the Department of Education, banning it from handling “any office or program related to elementary or secondary education.”
But just before the bill came to the floor on Thursday, Massie’s amendment got tweaked to mollify those moderates’ concerns.
The GOP’s balancing act doesn’t apply only to amendments. House Republicans are facing headwinds on another major priority: how to frame their underlying bill designed to address boosting security at the U.S.-Mexico border.
On one side, there’s Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus who’s pushing a bill to severely restrict migration into the U.S. But on the other side are Reps. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas), Mario Diaz Balart (R-Fla.) and their allies — who are more moderate on the issue and fear Roy’s bill could ultimately bar asylum claims.
Roy and Gonzales’ feud has appeared to devolve from policy disagreements to personal grudges, enough so that GOP leadership has spoken to both Texans to try to smooth other matters, according to one senior House Republican who was granted anonymity to speak freely about internal conversations.
And with that border bill in flux, so too is the Judiciary Committee’s long-anticipated hearing on it.

Roy, who sits on Judiciary, said he still expects the panel to take up his bill next week.
“There have been some conversations about figuring out timing. But look, the bill’s been ready. It continues to be ready. We ought to bring it up next week,” Roy said in an interview. While he declined to speak about his conversations with Gonzales, he said he believed GOP leaders would ultimately back him.
“I expect leadership to get fully behind it, and do what they need to do,” Roy said. “I expect we’ll vote on it next week. This is why leadership gets paid the big bucks. It’s their game now.”
While Roy and Gonzales have seemingly hit pause on their recent Twitter brawling, Republicans are skeptical that the two have closed the gap on their policy differences.
“I don’t think it changed anything. I mean, they are on different ends of the spectrum,” the senior House Republican said, adding that one possible solution getting discussed is to pursue “separate bills, and see which one has more support.”
Gonzales indicated that his colleague was correct, declining to confirm that leadership has intervened in his dispute with Roy and responding: “I try not to waste my time with people that try to waste my time.”
“Look, I have spent a lot of time being a reasonable actor in this whole deal. And I’m dealing with people that aren’t reasonable actors,” Gonzales added. “So guess what? The rules of the game have changed and the border security package that’s in Homeland Security has a long way to go before it gets my support.”
This undesirable option comes as the timeline to move on border policy is narrowing, with Republicans saying they need to start moving. The more pressing matter, though, is the GOP’s education bill, which will hit the floor later Thursday.
Days before that floor debate, McCarthy and his leadership team privately fielded concerns from multiple conference members about possible “poison pill” amendments, such as those relating to LGBTQ students or banning books. Some of those Republicans were under pressure from groups like the National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers union, which opposes the “parents’ bill of rights” proposal and supports some centrist GOP lawmakers.
Another House Republican, this one closely allied with leadership, said members threatened a potential “jail break” before leadership addressed worries among various members had that the bill would disrupt the principle of federalism. This GOP member said leadership “substantially” reduced members’ concerns, particularly by telling them that the bill was designed to give parents information about theoretical rights rather than to directly interfere in local matters.
“Leadership has been aggressive in beating back the substantial concerns members had about federalism,” this Republican said, also addressing internal discussions candidly on condition of anonymity.
As the vote nears, GOP leaders believe they have resolved many of their internal concerns with the roughly 20 amendments from both parties that are expected to receive floor votes.
Still, Republicans will be watching a pair of amendments closely, both from Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.): One states that parents must be informed if a school’s athletic programs allow transgender girls to play on a gender identity-aligned sports team, while the other requires parents to be informed if a transgender girl is allowed to use gender identity-aligned bathrooms.
[ad_2]
#House #GOP #infighting #threatening #ability #bills #door
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 23, 2023
‘Unlawful’: Manhattan DA stiff-arms House GOP info request on Trump case

[ad_1]

Her letter amounts to a sharp rebuke of a GOP inquiry launched days after Trump personally predicted his own imminent arrest, nudging House Republicans to rally behind him. Dubeck indicated that Bragg’s office had adopted the Justice Department’s longstanding position to refuse to provide Congress with details of ongoing criminal investigations — while also saying that the office would “meet and confer” with the lawmakers’ aides to determine if any information could be shared.
“The District Attorney is obliged by the federal and state constitutions to protect the independence of state law enforcement functions from federal interference. The DA’s Office therefore requests an opportunity to meet and confer with committee staff to better understand what information the DA’s Office can provide that relates to a legitimate legislative interest and can be shared consistent with the District Attorney’s constitutional obligations,” Dubeck wrote.
The senior Republicans’ request for information — supplemented Wednesday by two additional letters from Jordan — raises unusual questions about the scope of Congress’ jurisdiction over state and local criminal matters. Democrats sharply rejected the notion that Congress plays any role in overseeing non-federal investigations.
Dubeck’s reply came just ahead of a 10 a.m. deadline that Republicans set for Bragg to set up an closed-door transcribed interview with their aides, as well as to hand over a broad swath of documents including any related to potential federal funding of or involvement in his work.
Dubeck said that Bragg’s office would submit a letter describing its use of federal funds — which Speaker Kevin McCarthy indicated could face revocation. She further requested a meeting with committee staff to determine if they had “any legitimate legislative purpose in the requested materials that could be accommodated without impeding those sovereign interests.”
But Dubeck emphasized that questions about the office’s use of federal funds does not justify a congressional attempt to unearth nonpublic information about the ongoing probe.
Broadly speaking, her letter emphasized that even though Bragg’s office sharply rejects the notion that its Trump probe is political, the forum for probing those allegations would be court proceedings in New York, not Congress.
Comer, Jordan and Steil didn’t immediately respond on Thursday. But House Judiciary Republicans’ Twitter account tweeted shortly after the letter that “Alvin Bragg should focus on prosecuting actual criminals in New York City rather than harassing a political opponent in another state.“

The initial letter from Comer, Jordan and Steil didn’t hint at what their next steps would be if Bragg didn’t comply with their request. Jordan, in particular, frequently hints at using a “compulsory” process — in other words, a subpoena — if his demands aren’t meant, but the trio’s letter did not include that phrasing.
Jordan also sidestepped questions on Wednesday about whether he would try to subpoena Bragg if they didn’t comply with their requests.
The House GOP letter to Bragg emerged in the middle of the conference’s three-day confab in Orlando, Fla., a gathering meant to focus on their broader agenda. Bragg is reportedly preparing for the possibility that the former president will be indicted on charges related to alleged hush money payment to Stormy Daniels.
The threat of an indictment loomed over the retreat, the latest example of House Republicans’ inability to escape Trump’s long shadow. McCarthy (R-Calif.) almost immediately vowed that he would direct committees to investigate the potential indictment, and Republicans got questions at nearly every press event they held in Florida.
And Trump’s social-media suggestion of an imminent arrest appeared to have achieved its intended goal by sparking a near-immediate rush of support from House Republicans, including McCarthy’s vow that he would direct committees to investigate.
Jordan also wrote to former special prosecutors Carey Dunne and Mark Pomerantz, both worked on the investigation before leaving last year, on Wednesday night with a request for interviews and documents.
[ad_2]
#Unlawful #Manhattan #stiffarms #House #GOP #info #request #Trump #case
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 23, 2023
Never Don and Never Ron: The rest of the GOP field looks for a third lane

[ad_1]

“Ron DeSantis is copying Donald Trump on Ukraine, entitlement reform, and who knows what’s next?” Haley adviser Nachama Soloveichik said in a statement to POLITICO, describing the former South Carolina governor as “a leader on these serious issues facing our country’s future” who “will continue to note her differences with both Republicans and Democrats who want to bury their heads in the sand.”
“Republicans deserve a choice, not a copycat,” Soloveichik said.
A spokesperson for DeSantis did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The result has been a subterranean primary campaign within the primary campaign: a battle for a third-ranking spot in the Republican nominating contest. It is a position that could attract a smaller coalition of traditional conservatives — as the former president and DeSantis fish from the same pond of more populist-minded GOP voters — but one that could provide an outside chance of winning.
Haley this week placed an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal decrying “the weakness from some on the right” concerning Ukraine, while criticizing DeSantis’ “backward” suggestion that the conflict is a “territorial dispute.” In recent days, the former UN Ambassador has taken to Fox News to bash both Trump and DeSantis on the topic. “Trump is wrong in this way,” she told Brian Kilmeade, in what constituted a rare public rebuke of her former boss. She added, for good measure, that “DeSantis is completely wrong on this.”
DeSantis, who in Congress was hawkish on aid to Ukraine, last week announced his public position against continued military support for the country following pressure from Trump and his allies to take a stance on the issue. And despite previously supporting raising the retirement age and privatizing Social Security, DeSantis has more recently joined Trump in saying the programs like it and Medicare shouldn’t be touched.
For his part, Pence has deliberately sought to display contrasts with Trump and DeSantis perhaps more than any other competitor likely to enter the field.
“Mike has always been a limited government, consistent, constitutional conservative,” said Marc Short, Pence’s top adviser. “Voters and donors appreciate that consistency.”

On Tuesday evening at Washington & Lee University in Virginia, Pence sought to distinguish himself from Trump and DeSantis by calling for “common sense and compassionate” entitlement reforms. Echoing the more traditional GOP position, he told reporters he could not “endorse voices in our party today that simply want to walk past the problem of national debt by pledging to never touch Social Security and Medicare.”
The attempt to differentiate themselves from Trump and DeSantis is unlikely to result in an immediate surge of new support for either Haley or Pence, GOP operatives predict. But should Trump’s campaign crumble in the face of multiple indictments, and DeSantis fails to gain traction, it could set them up as fallback options and more traditional Republican leaders.
“You have to hold onto a narrative line that separates you from the populism of Trump,” said Chuck Coughlin, an Arizona-based political strategist. “I think they have to do it. And it’s a healthy thing, a sign that there’s a heartbeat in the Republican Party.”
The distinctions haven’t just been drawn around entitlements and Ukraine. Pence has also expressed disagreement with DeSantis’ revoking of Disney’s special tax status, calling it “beyond the scope of what I as a conservative, a limited government Republican, would be prepared to do.”
On the matter of Trump’s Supreme Court appointments and last summer’s anti-abortion ruling, Pence has taken a victory lap on the issue in ways his former boss hasn’t. When the ruling came down, Pence issued a statement saying “we must not rest and must not relent until the sanctity of life is restored to the center of American law in every state in the land.”
While Pence’s Tuesday night event highlighted his position on entitlement reforms, Haley has also openly called for changing Social Security and Medicare before solvency issues force cuts in the coming years.
She has suggested raising the retirement age for younger generations, cutting benefits for the wealthy, adjusting benefits based on inflation and expanding the Medicare Advantage program, which relies on private insurers. Trump has long balked at touching the programs. DeSantis, meanwhile, has reversed his support as a congressman for restructuring them.
It’s a risky bet for Haley and Pence to frame themselves at odds with Trump’s policies, even as foreign intervention and fiscal responsibility are policy positions that the pair have previously championed.
Republican primary voters now tend to be more skeptical of continued Ukraine aid, according to a new Morning Consult poll that found 46% believe supporting Ukraine is “not a vital U.S. interest.” GOP sentiment on the issue has changed dramatically in the last year. Still, more than one-third of the GOP, 37 percent, say it’s in the United States’ interest to support the country’s defense against Russia.
Paul Shumaker, a Republican pollster in North Carolina, also said staking out different positions from the frontrunners on issues like foreign policy and entitlement reform “is not enough to get you to a winning coalition.” But, he added, it could come in handy if the GOP field dramatically shifts in the coming months and the stakes become higher with the war in Ukraine.
“It could be very smart politics come the end of this year,” Shumaker said. “Just depends on what happens in the spirit of global affairs” — and whether the continued conflict “puts us into a new Cold War mentality” as seen during elections in the 1960s and 1980s.
[ad_2]
#Don #Ron #rest #GOP #field #lane
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 23, 2023
Not just Ukraine: GOP splinters on Iraq war repeal

[ad_1]
“Voters are tired of wars that don’t have any justification or basis,” said Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who has supported advancing the repeal of 1991 and 2002 authorizations for war in Iraq. “The Iraq thing, that was not justifiable … And that’s hard for my party to admit. Because they pushed it, they carried the water for it.”
Former President Donald Trump has aligned more with Hawley, casting the Iraq war as a mistake throughout his 2016 campaign. But he’s staying quiet on the war authorization debate as his 2024 campaign prepares for a looming indictment; his spokesperson didn’t return a request for comment on the issue. And while president, Trump did not support peeling back the Iraq War authorization, muddying his position significantly.
Meanwhile, plenty of Senate Republicans disagree — 19 of them voted to advance the repeal of military force authorizations this week, a group that spans the conference’s ideological spectrum. And on the other side of the aisle, every Senate Democrat voted to support repeal while the Biden White House has voiced support for nixing the war authorizations.
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), for his part, appears on the opposite side of Hawley on the war powers debate. The potential 2024 contender voted against advancing the repeal of the Iraq authorizations, though his office didn’t respond to a request for comment on his ultimate stance.
Supporters of preserving the decades-old war powers argue repealing the authorizations without a replacement that’s tailored to modern-day threats would be a mistake, even after Saddam Hussein and other original drivers of the war have been vanquished.
“I understand Saddam is gone. The war is over. But we do have soldiers stationed in Iraq and close to the Iraqi government,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who is seeking to amend the repeal of Iraq authorizations with provisions covering Iran. “And I want to make sure that if you repeal the 2002 [authorization for the use of military force], you replace it with something that’s relevant to today.”
One key ingredient missing from the Senate this week is Minority Leader Mitch McConnell — a strong advocate for keeping previous war authorizations in place who is off the Hill recovering from a concussion. His chief deputy, Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), said on Wednesday that while “I personally believe they serve important legal and presidential functions when it comes to the war on terror, there is a diversity of opinion among Republicans.”
In other words, McConnell probably couldn’t have stopped the war powers repeal from passing, even if he’d tried.

And even as they argue in favor of keeping the authorizations, many Republicans concede the debate is unlikely to be a major factor in their presidential primary next year — a battle that’s likely to be dominated by social issues, inflation and crime.
“I don’t know whether it’s actually penetrated people’s consciousness,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), an opponent of repealing the authorizations, said in an interview. “To me, this is more of a symbolic gesture than anything else.”
Yet it’s an incredibly important topic for the GOP, particularly after Trump campaigned and won on harsh criticism of the Iraq war only to later oppose winding down the authorization that launched it. Whether it’s Trump or someone else, the next Republican president will have to settle on a position that addresses whether repealing the military force authorizations might bind a future commander-in-chief’s hands.
“I don’t know that it will be a primary issue, but I do think it’s an important issue that we should be discussing,” said Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), a member of the party’s chamber leadership.
In some ways, it’s easier to keep the old authorizations in place given how difficult it is for a president to get congressional approval for war. In 2013, then-President Barack Obama sought a war authorization for Syria. It got through committee — then lawmakers abandoned it.
Since then, many members of Congress — like Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Todd Young (R-Ind.) — focused on repealing old authorizations far more than entertaining new ones. Kaine said his repeal plan got more GOP support than he would have expected, crediting first-term Sens. J.D. Vance of Ohio, Ted Budd of North Carolina and Eric Schmitt of Missouri for infusing the party with new energy on the idea.
But Kaine gave Trump very little credit for changing the debate, instead saying it’s President Joe Biden who respected Congress’ right to make decisions on war and peace.
“Trump had different points of view on Iraq at different times. And President Trump was always against repeals of AUMF. We tried them with Trump — even the ‘02 — and he was rock solid against it,” Kaine recalled.
Trump’s own band of supporters in Congress are split. Sens. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) and Graham support keeping the old authorizations in place, while Schmitt and Vance want to scrap them. In an interview, Schmitt described himself as an example of where conservatives are landing these days on matters of war.
With full attendance, repealing the last congressional vestiges of the Iraq war might get 70 Senate votes. Lawmakers continue to haggle over which amendments to the bill will be considered, with final passage expected next week.
Some in the chamber, like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), are pressing to go further by seeking to modify or even repeal the broad 2001 AUMF that Congress passed in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks — which remains in effect. But Kaine conceded last week that there is insufficient support to examine that authorization right now.
Clearing the Senate would, of course, be just the first step toward the war powers repeal becoming law. Speaker Kevin McCarthy would then have to find a way forward on a rare issue that unites Democrats and archconservatives in his narrowly-split chamber.
But some Republican supporters are optimistic that after years of attempts, this is the moment for repeal.
“There’s going to be more interest than you’d see in the past,” said Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.), who is retiring at the end of his term as he runs for governor. “I think it’s a smart move to do what we’re doing.”
[ad_2]
#Ukraine #GOP #splinters #Iraq #war #repeal
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 23, 2023
McCarthy’s newest challenge: Keeping the House GOP peace on war powers

[ad_1]

“I’m going to try to make the argument that it should be repealed,” Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), one of McCarthy’s chief antagonists in the January speakership race, said in a brief interview about the upcoming debate.
McCarthy gave a symbolic boost to conservatives like Gaetz this week by saying that he’s willing to repeal the 2002 war powers measure, known as an authorization for the use of military force. Yet that comment came with a big caveat: The California Republican doesn’t plan to fast-track a war powers bill to the floor any time soon.
“Just because a bill passes in the Senate,” McCarthy told reporters on Tuesday, “doesn’t mean it comes directly to the floor.”
Such a delay may stall, but wouldn’t alleviate, a major headache for McCarthy’s team. Conservatives and Democrats, if they align on repealing both the 2002 and 1991 military force authorizations, have a coalition big enough to overpower Republican strategy on the floor.
McCarthy is leaning on some of his biggest national security hawks to craft a workable alternate war powers plan, including Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Michael McCaul (R-Texas), a longtime skeptic of repealing the 2002 Iraq War authorization. And as he gears up to lobby his libertarian-leaning colleagues, McCaul is reviving an infamous GOP phrase from its anti-Obamacare days: Repeal and replace.
“I would prefer if we’re going to repeal it, to replace it,” McCaul said. “We’re having discussions with the speaker’s office on that, just to update it.”
That decision won’t be in McCarthy’s hands forever. The House Armed Services Committee, which takes the lead on a massive defense policy bill every year, likely has a slim majority of votes to nix the 2002 war powers authorization. And McCarthy’s earlier vows to allow “open season” on amendments to big spending bills would allow Republicans — or Democrats — on either side of the war powers debate to force their own floor votes on the matter.
Should a standalone war powers repeal bill come up, only a handful of Republicans would need to vote in favor of repeal in order for it to pass, since virtually every Democrat is on board. (If that happens, however, it would break a longtime House Republican principle that states no bill should pass without a “majority of the majority” on board.)

Then there’s the likely long-shot Plan B to force floor debate on war powers: a so-called “discharge petition,” which allows rank-and-file members to force a bill past leadership and to a vote by collecting signatures from a majority of House members. McCarthy allies, though, are skeptical that a discharge petition would work.
But before all that, the Senate needs to act. The upper chamber is set to officially nullify the president’s blank-check powers in Iraq as soon as this week, marking nearly 20 years to the day since the U.S. invasion of Baghdad. The same vote would also formally end U.S. war powers related to the 1991 Gulf War and turn the spotlight across the Capitol.
“I am encouraged that in the House members from both sides of the aisle seem to be open to taking action once the Senate passes this resolution,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Tuesday. “And there are members of the Senate Republican leadership who seem very strongly for the bill. That’s a very good sign.”
Nineteen Republican senators backed an initial procedural vote to repeal the war authorizations last week, an early sign of big bipartisan backing. Schumer on Tuesday promised a “reasonable amendment process” but said “AUMF repeal in the Senate is now a matter of when, not a matter of if.”
Some House Republicans said they couldn’t predict how their conference would treat the bill, given the uncertain status of amendments. And McCarthy is clearly trying to hit the brakes on a potential floor confrontation, saying he wants to “front load” the details of a potential deal through committee rather than in a free-for-all on the floor.
That’s where McCaul comes in. He’s currently pitching a repeal of the 2002 law packaged with a simultaneous replacement in the form of a new military authorization for terrorist groups that are not country-specific as well as Shiite militias inside of Iraq. (He argues a broader 2001 “war on terror” authorization doesn’t do that, though not every lawmaker agrees with him. And Democrats are also skeptical of the Texas Republican over concerns he’ll try to drag the 2001 authorization into any war powers discussion, setting a much higher bar to a deal.)
But McCaul is already trying to think of how to win over potential GOP detractors who might be worried about green-lighting another decades-long war power, planning to add a built-in expiration date to whatever might replace the 2002 law.
“I would really like to start working toward replacement, because I think people are just getting tired of these old authorizations. And I would also put a five-year sunset in these things, so that Congress is forced to take it back up,” he said.
Though McCaul is already privately suggesting his plan to McCarthy, he said its fate is in “leadership’s hands right now.”
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.), asked about how to bring up a bill without losing a majority of GOP members, signaled that Republicans are still squarely in the discussion phase about “this question of if it is time to revise or revisit” the war powers measures. He did not address the potential timing of House action.
“The threats of terrorism are still real, but the battlefields have changed,” Scalise said in an interview, adding that “all the committees of jurisdiction are starting to have that conversation.”
At least one of McCarthy’s close allies has been vocally pressing for repeal — and senses that the time could be ripe to finally unite Congress and the White House on the issue. President Joe Biden said recently that he would sign a repeal of the 2002 war powers.
“It sounds like opposition is softening, and certainly McCarthy seems more open to it,” said House Rules Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.), one of the leading sponsors of a 2002 war powers repeal.
Cole added there could be additional steps, such as attaching amendments to the Senate version and going to conference — a much longer process. Still, he sounded upbeat: “I’m just glad to see that opinion is beginning to coalesce around getting this done.”
Olivia Beavers, Anthony Adragna and Connor O’Brien contributed to this report. Ferris reported from Washington.
[ad_2]
#McCarthys #newest #challenge #Keeping #House #GOP #peace #war #powers
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 22, 2023
Republican Candidates 2024: Meet the GOP Presidential Hopefuls

[ad_1]

We put the presidential hopefuls into categories based roughly on their chances to get the GOP nomination.

[ad_2]
#Republican #Candidates #Meet #GOP #Presidential #Hopefuls
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 20, 2023
Why an indictment may help Trump — and threaten the GOP

[ad_1]

Sensing an opening, Trump’s campaign began to turn the impending indictment into a litmus test for the rest of the field: either defend the ex-president, they warned, or be labeled a leftist sympathizer.
Even Trump’s GOP detractors began to see the writing on the wall.
“He’s become the new Teflon president,” said Michael Brodkorb, a former deputy chair of the Minnesota Republican Party and a longtime critic of Trump. “He is someone who has built his entire political empire on being the victim all the time, and being the martyr, and this is just another example.”
For the duration of the Trump era, Trump has sought to turn one seemingly disqualifying scandal after another into his benefit. Sometimes he’s succeeded (the Access Hollywood tape was not the dagger everyone expected it to be), sometimes he’s struggled (the aftermath of the riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 remains largely unkind). In each case, he’s survived.
The expected, coming indictment will test that once more; though, so far, the timing could hardly be better for him. If he is arrested this week, it will once more frame the early stages of the presidential primary around him, just as Pence, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and several other high-profile Republicans consider launching their own campaigns.
“It seems very evident that the left is trying everything they can to discredit former President Donald Trump,” said Bruce Cherry, chair of Seminole County Republican executive committee in Florida, who said the “best possible ticket this country could have” would be Trump as the presidential nominee alongside DeSantis, as his running mate. “The indictment, I feel, doesn’t mean anything.”
If anything, Republicans say, Trump will benefit from a short-term rush of support, much as he did following the FBI’s seizure of documents from his Mar-a-Lago estate last year. It may not manifest itself in national polls — where independent and Democratic voters will be reminded of the drama and scandals that seem to perpetually follow Trump. But one national GOP strategist, granted anonymity to discuss the political fallout, said the ex-president would likely enjoy an immediate fundraising boost in an otherwise unfriendly political environment.
“Small-dollar donors are down,” this person said. “It’s going to motivate them. It proves there is a witch hunt.”

On right-wing social media channels over the weekend, some Trump supporters were debating the merits of violent versus nonviolent protest, loosely contemplating a trucker strike or a bank run while others warned of a deep state “trap.” Unlike legal challenges Trump faces in Fulton County, Ga., and in a special counsel probe around Jan. 6, the case in New York is coming from a district attorney in Manhattan, viewed by many Republicans as an epicenter of the excesses of the left.
“In this case, I think Republicans will rally around Trump initially,” said Whit Ayres, a longtime Republican pollster. “Long-term, it depends on what happens with this case, as well as the other criminal investigations.”
If Trump ends up facing multiple indictments, Ayres said, it’s possible that primary voters who are at least open to other Republican presidential candidates will see him as having too much “baggage.” But, he cautioned, no one fully can understand how it will all play out. After all, it’s never happened before.
“I have never studied the indictment of a former president and leading presidential candidate,” Ayres said, “and I’ve never done any polling on the indictment of a former president and leading presidential candidate.”
One nagging fear of some Trump critics is that the case against him may prove to be weak, and that beating it could further embolden him. Former Rep. Peter Meijer, the Michigan Republican who lost his primary last year after voting to impeach Trump over his role in the Jan. 6 riot, said “bullshit Dem crusades help Trump in his primary, which, if he wins, helps Dems by getting the weakest GOP candidate to the general.”
Trump’s highest profile 2024 GOP critic of late, Pence, declined to twist the knife on Saturday. Campaigning in Iowa at foreign policy forum hosted by the Bastion Institute, he told reporters: “No one is above the law. I’m confident President Trump can take care of himself.”
But privately, Pence’s allies have made the case that Trump is likely to face more indictments related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
“He’s trying to walk a pretty narrow fence line,” Mike Murphy, a former Indiana Republican state lawmaker who is close to Pence, said of the former vice president’s comments. “He’s trying to keep Trump at arm’s length. But at the same time he knows the Republican base is going to go nuts if this happens on Tuesday. He has to come off as empathetic to their concerns, without being empathetic to Trump. The more serious potential indictment is in Atlanta. He’s going to be clear on that one that right is right and wrong is wrong.”
It’s possible that Trump is overplaying his hand, with his call to “Protest, take our nation back!” and with a rally on Saturday in Waco, Texas, the first of his 2024 campaign. If protests do not materialize — or if crowd sizes are paltry — “it’ll show that the Trump movement is sputtering,” said one longtime Republican strategist who was granted anonymity to discuss the dynamics of the 2024 campaign.
It’s also possible that Republicans fixated on electability will, after Trump’s loss in 2020 and a disappointing midterm, see Trump’s indictment as untenable in a general election.
“At some point, some of his supporters will see that the pile-on effect of these legal actions directly affects his ability to win a general election,” said Dick Wadhams, a former Colorado Republican Party chair and longtime party strategist. “There is a reality that could start sinking in that he’s going to be diverted by these legal actions through the entire campaign, probably.”
The biggest fear for some Republicans, however, is that an indictment may truly hurt Trump and the GOP just when the party needs to win back independents and moderate Republicans who ran away from them in 2020. Images of an indicted former president or of the protests it sparks could be painful reminders of his time in office.
“It helps him in the Republican primary, but he was going to win the Republican primary, anyway,” said Mike Madrid, the Republican strategist who was a co-founder of the anti-Trump Lincoln Project.
The problem for the GOP, he said, is that even if an indictment further intensifies Trump’s base, it will do nothing for the party in the general election.
“The intensity of a shrinking base is not the sign of a growing movement,” Madrid said. “It’s the sign of a dwarf star imploding.”
Natalie Allison contributed to this report.

[ad_2]
#indictment #Trump #threaten #GOP
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 19, 2023
House GOP ignored Capitol Police requests to review public Jan. 6 footage, lawyer says

[ad_1]

The department is typically loath to appear at odds with House leaders in particular, since it relies on the majority party for its budget and are charged with protecting its members.
Last month Republicans started requesting the same footage that the Jan. 6 select committee had access to. Those requests came first from Tim Monahan — who doubles as a top aide to Speaker Kevin McCarthy and as a staff director for the House Administration Committee — and then from Rep. Bryan Steil (R-Wis.), the chair of that panel, which has jurisdiction over Capitol security.
Within days, DiBiase indicated, the Capitol Police installed three terminals in a House office building to grant access to the footage. And DiBiase said he also provided four hard drives he had received from the Democratic-led Jan. 6 panel after it completed its work.
“At no time was I nor anyone else from the Capitol Police informed that anyone other than personnel from [the House Administration Committee] would be reviewing the camera footage,” DiBiase indicated.
Later last month, media reports indicated that McCarthy had granted access to the footage to Carlson’s producers. DiBiase said he later learned that “personnel from the Tucker Carlson Show were allowed to view whatever footage they wanted while supervised by staff from [the House Administration Committee] but that no footage had been physically turned over to the show.”
A week later, Monahan requested a list of Capitol Police cameras that were deemed “sensitive” because they include details about evacuation routes or locations such as intelligence committee facilities.
“We worked with the Capitol Police ahead of time to identify any security-sensitive footage and made sure it wasn’t released,” said Mark Bednar, a spokesperson for McCarthy. “In subsequent conversations, the USCP General Counsel confirmed that the department concluded there are no security concerns with what was released.”
A GOP committee aide, asked about the statements in the affidavit, noted that the Republicans asked the Capitol Police for a list of security sensitive cameras “to ensure anything on the list requested by Tucker was approved by USCP, which we did.”

The aide added that Capitol Police “told us they had no concern with what was released,” but didn’t immediately respond to follow up questions about if that comment came before or after the footage aired on Fox, and if it applied to both the clip Capitol Police was able to review and those that they say they weren’t.
DiBiase emphasized that in “numerous conversations” over “several weeks,” he informed Monahan that the Capitol Police wanted “to review every footage clip, whether it was on the Sensitive List or not, if it was going to be made public.” The Jan. 6 select committee had gone through that process with the department “in all cases,” DiBiase said, as had federal prosecutors pursuing cases against hundreds of Capitol riot defendants.
“Of the numerous clips shown during the Tucker Carlson show on March 6 and 7, 2023, I was shown only one clip before it aired, and that clip was from the Sensitive List,” he continued. “Since that clip was substantially similar to a clip used in the Impeachment Trial and was publicly available, I approved the use of the clip. The other approximately 40 clips, which were not from the Sensitive List, were never shown to me nor anyone else from the Capitol Police.”
DiBiase left some key details about his interactions with the House Administration Committee unanswered. For example, he didn’t indicate whether anyone on the panel had agreed to his requests for a preview of the footage.
Notably, DiBiase indicated that the House managers of Donald Trump’s impeachment trial after the Jan. 6 attack, who used about 15 Capitol security camera clips, did not preview them with the department before using them in the February 2021 proceedings. Those clips included “some from the Sensitive List.” The footnote caught the attention of Republicans who pointed to it on Friday, as an example of when Democrats had provided “zero consultation.”
Bednar also pointed to the impeachment trial footage and said House Republicans had taken more steps to protect security sensitive material than impeachment managers did.
Capitol Police Chief Thomas Manger said in a statement earlier this month that he has little control over the footage once it’s provided to lawmakers.
Manger himself fiercely criticized Carlson and Fox News’ handling of the footage, saying it minimized the violence and chaos of Jan. 6 and portrayed Capitol Police officers’ actions in a “misleading” and “offensive” light.
DiBiase’s statement came in the case of William Pope, a Jan. 6 defendant who is representing himself and has moved to publicly release a trove of Jan. 6 security footage. Several other Jan. 6 defendants have cited Carlson’s access to the trove of footage in their own pending matters and said they intend to seek access. But, DiBiase noted in the affidavit, while Administration staff had said last week that no footage had been shown to any defendant or defense counsel, the Capitol Police had received additional requests to review the footage.
McCarthy’s decision to release the footage sparked weeks of questions for House Republicans. It’s also just the beginning of GOP lawmakers’ work to relitigate the attack, with the Administration Committee currently reviewing the previous Jan. 6 select committee’s work and promising to investigate Capitol security decisions leading up to the day. Meanwhile, Republicans on the House Oversight Committee are planning a trip to visit the individuals jailed in connection with Jan. 6.
McCarthy has defended his decision to give access to the footage to Carlson, who has falsely portrayed the attack as nonviolent. The speaker and House Administration Committee members have pledged to release the footage more widely.
“I think putting it out all to the American public, you can see the truth, see exactly what transpired that day and everybody can have the exact same” access, McCarthy recently told reporters. “My intention is to release it to everyone.”
[ad_2]
#House #GOP #Capitol #Police #requests #review #public #Jan #footage #lawyer
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 17, 2023
‘You think I’m crazy?’ Florida GOP sweats Trump vs. DeSantis

[ad_1]

The Florida delegation’s 20 House GOP members are clearly wary of choosing sides between the party’s two heavyweight 2024 contenders, as the former president takes shots at their governor even before he formally enters the race. And it’s not hard to figure out why lawmakers are staying out of it — a wrong decision risks political repercussions.
Trump is notorious for his revenge politics, having spent his two post-White House years taking down GOP lawmakers who crossed him by encouraging his base to support their primary opponents. But with his influence in the party on the wane, Florida Republicans are just as acutely aware that they need a strong relationship with their governor.
And DeSantis, who’s especially vocal on natural disaster response and home-state projects, has the power to inflict pain over any of his own grudges. Which puts Florida’s House Republicans in quite a bind as they gather for their annual retreat, set to start Sunday in Orlando.
First-term Rep. Aaron Bean (R-Fla.) was more succinct than Dunn, calling it “Sophie’s choice” in a reference to the four-decade-old film about a woman forced to kill one of her two children.
Another Florida Republican, granted anonymity to speak candidly, addressed Don vs. Ron by exclaiming: “Do you think I want to talk about that? You think I’m crazy?”
Conversations with every member of Florida’s GOP congressional delegation (excepting Rep. Greg Steube, whose office did not respond to a written request for comment while he recovers after a January fall) point to clear future fractures over which candidate to support. And decision time is quickly approaching, as early polling shows the party primary trending towards a two-way battle between the two Floridians.
While Trump hasn’t started pursuing endorsements in the state yet, his level of support on the Hill is still off to a lackluster start. Only two Florida Republicans, Reps. Matt Gaetz and Anna Paulina Luna, have publicly endorsed his 2024 bid since he launched his campaign in November.
“Who am I supporting, Governor DeSantis or Trump? Trump,” Luna said without missing a beat. “I love DeSantis. I don’t think anyone will ever be able to compete with him as governor and I’ll be sad to see if he leaves early. I hope he doesn’t, but I love them both.”

Others are preparing to hear an endorsement request from Trump.
“I think I’ll get a call soon,” said Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla.), who said he is undecided in the GOP primary and would consider DeSantis. “We will have a nice discussion.”
No Florida members have openly endorsed DeSantis, who has not yet announced a campaign. One Republican described DeSantis’ outreach so far as “non-existent.”
As Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) put it: “Candidly, he’s not in the race. So members are not gonna put themselves on the line.”
But some subtly indicated that they’re leaning toward their state’s governor.
“DeSantis is the ideal candidate,” one Florida Republican lawmaker said, granted anonymity to speak candidly.
“The most important thing is, Florida will be in the mix,” Bean said. And when pressed about the choice, Bean didn’t explicitly answer, but he praised DeSantis and noted the two of them served “side by side” for four years in the state Senate.
DeSantis has close ties with other House members as well. Some are former colleagues in a chamber where he served three terms before winning the governor’s mansion in 2018. Still other Florida GOP lawmakers know him from his own administration; first-term Rep. Laurel Lee (R-Fla.), for example, served as his secretary of state.
Some Florida GOP members, like Neal and freshman Rep. Cory Mills, say they’ve made up their minds about the presidential race but declined to name their choice. Other Florida Republicans, like Reps. Daniel Webster, Mario Diaz-Balart and Vern Buchanan, indicated they’re waiting to see who else runs.
“We’re gonna have to make a choice,” said Rep. John Rutherford (R-Fla.). “Choices are coming. … I’m open, but I do think it’s a good thing for the state of Florida.”
Buchanan declared that “I’m not getting in the middle of that. I want to let things play out, and so many people are going to be involved.”
Florida’s House Republicans referred to multiple different strategies to handle the choice ahead, from avoiding the primary to endorsing only after one of their two home-state candidates drops out.
But weighing their options also means acknowledging the pros and cons of each man.
Some Florida Republicans noted how accessible Trump is and was, not to mention his ability to deliver the resources they needed in their districts when it mattered. While the delegation largely reports a good working relationship with the governor’s staff, other Florida Republicans noted how little DeSantis has personally sought to build relationships with them ahead of a potential run.
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), who preceded DeSantis in the governor’s mansion, hinted at closed lines of communication with DeSantis in a brief interview, describing a relationship that became bumpy during their transition.
“DeSantis doesn’t talk to me, so I don’t know about DeSantis. I talk to Trump. I wish him all the best of luck,” Scott said, noting he hasn’t “historically” endorsed in primary races.
Gaetz made it clear that his once strong relationship with DeSantis has fizzled since the former helped the latter win the governor’s mansion.
“I have no ill will, but we are not as close as we once were when I was his transition chairman,” Gaetz said.
DeSantis supporters counter that he can be Trump without the drama, arguing that anointing him will help the party move away from the constant scandals of the former president’s term. While they see the Florida governor as skilled enough to go the distance, some acknowledge it is early and they are waiting to see how he fares against a bruise-inducing Trump if the duo winds up sharing a debate stage.
A few in the state brushed off the looming question altogether. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said he has “spent zero time thinking about” Trump vs. DeSantis, though the rivalry has been a constant topic of discussion among other lawmakers in the state.
The primary, Rubio added, “is a long ways away.”
Other Florida Republicans, however, are acutely aware that next week’s House retreat brings them to Trump and DeSantis’ shared backyard.
“It’ll be a tough primary,” Rutherford said. “Even though it’s coming quickly, it’s still kind of early.”
Burgess Everett and Marianne LeVine contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
#crazy #Florida #GOP #sweats #Trump #DeSantis
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 17, 2023