Lawmakers Reveal Text Of $1.2T Spending Bill To Avoid Government Shutdown

Lawmakers Reveal Text Of $1.2T Spending Bill To Avoid Government Shutdown

WASHINGTON - JUNE 5: The U.S. Capitol is shown June 5, 2003 in Washington, DC. Both houses of the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives meet in the Capitol. (Photo by Stefan Zaklin/Getty Images)
(Photo by Stefan Zaklin/Getty Images)

OAN’s James Meyers
9:14 AM -Thursday, March 21, 2024

SEE: https://www.oann.com/newsroom/lawmakers-reveal-text-of-1-2t-spending-bill-to-avoid-government-shutdown/; republished below in full, unedited, for informational, educational, & research purposes:

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill have released the details of the newest $1.2 trillion government funding bill negotiated by the Biden administration and leaders of both political parties. 

The new spending deal, which was announced on Tuesday, includes funding for the departments of Homeland Security, State, Labor, Defense, Health and Human Services.

However, the federal agencies listed are scheduled to shut down on Saturday if the funding package is not passed by Friday night and it’s unclear if Congress has enough time to pass it before the deadline. 

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) applauded the package in a statement on Thursday, saying “House Republicans have achieved significant conservative policy wins” during this year’s appropriations process.

“This FY24 appropriations legislation is a serious commitment to strengthening our national defense by moving the Pentagon toward a focus on its core mission while expanding support for our brave men and women who serve in uniform,” Johnson said. “Importantly, it halts funding for the United Nations agency which employed terrorists who participated in the October 7 attacks against Israel.”

The new deal will also include a ban on all direct U.S. funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian refugees. Johnson also said the latest funding will increase U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention capacity from 34,000 to 42,000 beds, and provide more funding for almost 22,000 Border Patrol agents. 

“In addition, the bipartisan agreement reached to fund the Department of Homeland Security moves the Department’s operations toward enforcing our border and immigration laws,” Johnson’s statement read. “It significantly cuts funding to NGOs that incentivize illegal immigration and increases detention capacity and the number of Border Patrol agents to match levels in the House-passed appropriations bill and the Secure the Border Act.”

“Overall, during the FY24 appropriations process, House Republicans have achieved significant conservative policy wins, rejected extreme Democrat proposals, and imposed substantial cuts to wasteful agencies and programs while strengthening border security and national defense,” Johnson added.

Once the House passes the bill, the Senate will then require unanimous consent to vote quickly. 

“Once the House sends us a funding package, I will put it on the floor of the Senate without delay,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, (D-N.Y.), said on the floor. “We haven’t had a government shutdown since 2019. There’s no good reason for us to have one this week.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, (R-Ky.), said, “Congress has secured a path forward to fund the Department of Homeland Security, which will allow us to complete the fiscal year 2024 appropriations process in the coming days.”

Meanwhile, if the bill is not passed, it would likely only impact a limited number of government operations if funding were to be restored before the end of the weekend. 

Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts

Biden’s Fentanyl Deal With China Failed to Stop Overdoses While Biden and Xi lie, Americans die.

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/bidens-fentanyl-deal-with-china-failed-to-stop-overdoses/; republished below in full, unedited, for informational, educational, & research purpose:

[Make sure to read Daniel Greenfield’s contributions in Jamie Glazov’s new book: Barack Obama’s True Legacy: How He Transformed America.]

Last November, Biden met with China’s Xi and the two leaders reached an agreement to tackle the fentanyl crisis fed by the traffic in precursor chemicals from the Communist dictatorship.

Three months later, the bodies were everywhere.

Fentanyl overdoses rose fourfold in Marin County in just 2 weeks, Oregon has the largest overdose rate in the nation and even children under 5 are dying of them in Tennessee.

And there’s no sign that the carnage is slowing down. 66 people died of drug overdoses in San Francisco in just the month of January. The majority of those deaths were fentanyl related.

Biden claimed after the meeting with Xi that China is “taking steps to shut down companies dealing in illicit trade and precursor chemicals.”

But officially what China did was send out warning letters to the firms shipping precursor chemicals to the cartels. Rather than warning Chinese companies that they faced action from their own government, the letters cautioned them that they faced legal action from America.

The companies making the poison killing Americans then had every reason to laugh it off.

Chinese firms were told to be “cautious about orders from the United States and Mexico and be wary of the exported items being used to manufacture drugs.”

Telling companies to be cautious and wary is a long way from a crackdown.

In sharp contrast to the warning letters, earlier that same year Chinese authorities raided the offices of American companies auditing local firms on behalf of U.S. investors.

Televised footage from all over Chinese media showed blue uniformed thugs breaking into offices, carrying away boxes of files and manhandling employees. The regime was sending a message and it did so in the usual unsubtle way that Communist governments always operate.

The People’s Republic of China was far more interested in cracking down on American firms detecting fraud in China’s Potemkin village economy than on drug rings and firms that bribe local officials to be able to continue murdering hundreds of thousands of American citizens.

China has spent far more time cracking down on tech firms than it has on drug precursor dealers. And, like the crackdown on auditors, it has done so publicly and prominently.

By contrast, China’s response to the fentanyl crisis has been to sweep it under the table.

In 2019, Chinese officials claimed that all the issues had been “resolved” after a handful of members of one smuggling network were convicted. Fentanyl was eventually treated as a controlled substance. Some of the most blatant online pitches for drug sales were toned down. And hundreds of thousands of Americans still went on to die of fentanyl because none of this substantively stopped the manufacturing and traffic of precursor chemicals out of China.

Now once again, Chinese authorities are sending out warning letters to companies and telling them that the government is keeping an eye on them. But smaller companies, which exist only on paper, just swap out old names for new ones and keep right on killing Americans.

Beijing pulled this same scam in 2019 only for the fentanyl crisis to grow worse.

Even as Biden administration officials claim that the Chinese crackdown is working, it’s easy to find Chinese manufacturers still pushing precursor chemicals through Whatsapp messages.

Biden administration officials keep claiming that every meeting with Chinese officials moves things forward, but Chinese officials tend to have a different story. In February,

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas met with Public Security Minister Wang Xiaohong in Vienna. Biden officials claimed that progress had been made on battling fentanyl, while Chinese media claimed that the focus was on letting Chinese students enter America.

Fentanyl is profitable for Communist China both economically and politically. The mass deaths of Americans provide Beijing with leverage on everything from tariffs to visas to Taiwan.

Lenin had once reportedly bragged that the capitalists would sell him the rope with which he would hang them. Americans are buying the fentanyl rope with which China is hanging us. Every shipment puts more money into China’s pockets while undermining America. And when American leaders ask China for help, they offer some limited cooperation, hold meetings at which they issue their own demands and then the regime which runs slave labor camps and conducts forced abortions claims that there are legal obstacles in the way of a crackdown.

The official line is that the marketplace is just too complicated for China to crack down on. The same regime, which relentlessly monitors every aspect of life, especially economic activity and contact with foreigners, claims to be helpless to stop a major form of international trade.

Chinese authorities are aware of which precursor chemicals can be used for the drug trade, where they are manufactured and then shipped. And if these were being used to kill their own citizens, the crackdown would have been immediate, ruthless and thoroughly comprehensive.

But the Biden administration has been more than happy to accept the myth of Chinese helplessness. Rather than seriously taking on China, Biden’s 2022 National Drug Control Strategy focused on working together with the Communist regime “on shared drug priorities”.

But Beijing has very different drug priorities than we do.

The Biden administration keeps holding out for empty promises. A White House adviser claimed that her boss believes the China deal has “the potential to make a real difference in the lives of Americans”. The potential is there, but only if Biden really gets serious about pressuring China.

And he isn’t.

Beijing understands that American politicians have short attention spans and wants some sort of photo op that allows them to claim that they’re handling the problem. The Communist regime is occasionally willing to play the game and go through the ritual of meetings and form letters, even while the underlying problem not only continues, but gets even worse.

In response to past pressure, China rerouted the fentanyl pipeline away from direct sales and toward cartel middlemen. The deal cut profits for Chinese dealers but maintained a core priority of harming Americans. The regime will similarly allow domestic manufacturers to play musical chairs with chemicals as they and their partners develop new, even deadlier drugs.

Plausible deniability allows Xi and Biden to pretend that they’re tackling the fentanyl crisis, but both men have more to gain than to lose from the epidemic. The drug trade is lucrative for China and the suffering from the fentanyl epidemic feeds the welfare state that serves as a core organizing and campaign mechanism for the Democratic Party. It’s a win-win situation.

And a lose-lose situation for millions of Americans.

42% of American adults in one survey said that they knew someone who had died of a drug overdose. Our communities are filling up with the casualties of a drug war that China is winning.

Avatar photo

Daniel Greenfield

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Tony Bobulinski SHREDS Raskin and Goldman in Hearing on Hunter Biden Family Business

In a recent hearing, Tony Bobulinski took aim at Jamie Raskin and Dan Goldman, accusing them of perpetuating lies across various media platforms. The hearing, convened by the House Oversight Committee amidst a Republican-led investigation, delved into allegations surrounding the business dealings of Joe and Hunter Biden. Testimony was provided by former associates of Hunter Biden, including Lev Parnas, once linked to Rudy Giuliani. Tony Bobulinski's testimony focused on purported connections between the Bidens and business ventures in China and Russia, suggesting their involvement in influence peddling. He claimed firsthand encounters with the Bidens in 2017, portraying them as actively engaged participants in the alleged dealings.

Kamala Harris’ stepdaughter is raising money for Hamas-linked UNRWA

SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2024/03/kamala-harris-stepdaughter-is-raising-money-for-hamas-linked-unrwa; republished below in full, unedited, for informational, educational, & research purposes:

Given the Biden regime’s increasingly obvious and ongoing betrayal of Israel, this is hardly a surprise.

“Kamala Harris’ stepdaughter Ella Emhoff publicly raises money for relief group allegedly tied to Oct. 7 terrorist attack on Israel,” by Jon Levine, New York Post, March 16, 2024:

The stepdaughter of Vice President Kamala Harris is publicly raising cash for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency — even as the United States has cut funding to the group over its members’ alleged participation in the Oct. 7 terrorist attack in Israel.

Ella Emhoff — whose father is second gentleman Doug Emhoff — posted a link to UNRWA’s English-language fundraising page on her personal Instagram, and only removed it after a Post inquiry to the White House.

“We urge Ms. Emhoff to go on the website of UN Watch and read our reports showing how UNRWA teachers and school principals systematically promote and encourage jihadi terrorism and the slaughter of Jews,” said Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of the nonprofit United Nations watchdog.

Emhoff — whose father is second gentleman Doug Emhoff — is currently posting a link to UNRWA’s English-language fundraising page on her personal Instagram.

“I am sure that if Ms. Emhoff understood how UNRWA promotes hatred and murder, she would stop raising money for them, and she would apologize to victims such as Ayelet Samerano, whose 21-year-old son Yonatan was kidnapped on October 7th by an UNRWA social worker.”

UNRWA, the largest employer in Gaza, has long faced international criticism for its close ties to Hamas, which has ruled the enclave since 2006.

President Trump cut U.S. aid to the organization in 2018 — a decision President Biden initially reversed when he took office.

Under Biden’s leadership, at least $730 million found its way to UNRWA’s coffers…

Charges Dropped Against Gold Star Father Who Heckled Biden

Charges Dropped Against Gold Star Father Who Heckled Biden

State of the Union 2024 TW
UNITED STATES - MARCH 7: Steven Nikoui, whose son, Marine Lance Cpl. Kareem Nikoui, was killed during the U.S. withdrawal of Afghanistan, heckles President Joe Biden during the State of the Union address in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol on Thursday, March 7, 2024. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
State of the Union 2024 TW UNITED STATES – MARCH 7: Steven Nikoui, whose son, Marine Lance Cpl. Kareem Nikoui, who was killed during the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, heckles President Joe Biden during the State of the Union address in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol on Thursday, March 7, 2024. (Tom Williams/C-Roll Call, Inc. via Getty Images)

OAN’s Abril Elfi
6:10 PM – Wednesday, March 20, 2024

SEE: https://www.oann.com/newsroom/charges-dropped-against-gold-star-father-who-heckled-biden/; republished below in full, unedited, for informational, educational, & research purposes:

Charges against the Gold Star father, who was arrested after harassing President Joe Biden during his State of the Union address, have been dropped. 

“A Gold Star Family is the immediate family member(s) of a fallen service member who died while serving in a time of conflict,” according to hopeforthewarriors.org.

Attorney General Brian Schwalb (D-D.C.) withdrew charges against the Gold Star father, who was detained after heckling President Biden during his State of the Union address on Tuesday, Republican lawmakers confirmed.

Representative Brian Mast (R-Fla.) told Fox News on Tuesday night that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) assisted in getting the charges against Steven Nikoui, 51, dropped for protesting during Biden’s speech. He was protesting in response to an earlier pleading from Representative Darrell Issa (R-Calif.).

“Though he interrupted the event, what Mr. Nikoui voiced out loud was a cry for the acknowledgment of the loss endured by the families of the 13 who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country,” Issa wrote in a letter to Capitol Police chief Thomas Manger on Tuesday.

Nikoui was taken into custody by U.S. Capitol Police after he yelled “Abby Gate!” and “Second Battalion, First Marines!” during Biden’s speech.

At a Capitol Hill hearing on the withdrawal from Afghanistan on Tuesday, he informed reporters that he remained charged despite calls from Mast, Issa, and Rep. Mike Waltz (R-Fla.) to have the case dismissed.

On August 26th, 2021, an ISIS suicide bomber outside Hamid Karzai International Airport killed 13 U.S. service members, including Nikoui’s son, Marine Lance Cpl. Kareem Nikoui.

According to Fox News, the District of Columbia Attorney General’s office defended its decision not to prosecute Nikoui by citing instances of previous protesters who were not charged.

Although Nikoui claims he had no intention of interrupting Biden, he grew irritated when the president only brought up the death of Georgia nursing student Laken Riley, rather than his son or the other twelve U.S. service members who perished in the Abbey Gate explosion. 

“I’ve waited three years, I paid $3,000, and I’ve traveled 3,000 miles to finally hear my son’s name in the State of the Union,” he told DailyMail.com. “That trip to the State of the Union—wwhat a kick in my ass.”

Nikoui had been charged with “crowding, obstructing, [and] incommoding Congress,” which is a misdemeanor that typically results in release after paying a $50 fine. 

Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts

 

Censorship & Surveillance Increasing in America with Mel K

Supreme Court Should Reject Clandestine Government Censorship of Online Speech

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2024/03/supreme-court-should-reject-clandestine-government-censorship-of-online-speech/?ct=t(RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN); republished below in full, unedited, for informational, educational, & research purposes:

free speech freedom censorship iStock-spukkato 887987546
iStock-spukkato 887987546

When federal officials persistently pressured social media platforms to delete or downgrade posts those officials did not like, a government lawyer told the Supreme Court on Monday, they were merely offering “information” and “advice” to their “partners” in fighting “misinformation.”

If the justices accept that characterization, they will be blessing clandestine government censorship of online speech.

The case, Murthy v. Missouri, pits two states and five social media users against federal officials who strongly, repeatedly and angrily demanded that Facebook et al. crack down on speeches the government viewed as dangerous to public health, democracy, or national security. Some of this “exhortation,” as U.S. Deputy Solicitor General Brian Fletcher described it, happened in public, as when President Joe Biden accused the platforms of “killing people” by allowing users to say things he believed would discourage Americans from being vaccinated against COVID-19.

Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, who echoed that charge in more polite terms, urged a “whole-of-society” effort to combat the “urgent threat to public health” posed by “health misinformation,” which he said might include “legal and regulatory measures.” Other federal officials said holding social media platforms “accountable” could entail antitrust action, new regulations, or expansion of their civil liability for user-posted content.

Those public threats were coupled with private communications that came to light only thanks to discovery in this case.

As Louisiana Solicitor General J. Benjamin Aguinaga noted on Monday, officials such as Deputy Assistant to the President Rob Flaherty “badger[ed] the platforms 24/7,” demanding that they broaden their content restrictions and enforce them more aggressively.

Those emails alluded to presidential displeasure and warned that White House officials were “considering our options on what to do” if the platforms failed to fall in line. The platforms responded by changing their policies and practices.

Facebook executive Nick Clegg was eager to appease the president.

In emails to Murthy, he noted that Facebook had “adjust[ed] policies on what we’re removing”; had deleted pages, groups, and accounts that offended the White House; and would “shortly be expanding our COVID policies to further reduce the spread of potentially harmful content.”

Facebook took those steps, Clegg said in another internal email that Aguinaga quoted, “because we were under pressure by the administration.” Clegg expressed regret about caving to that pressure, saying, “We shouldn’t have done it.”

According to Fletcher, none of this implicated the First Amendment, because “no threats happened.” He meant that federal officials never explicitly threatened platforms with “adverse government action” while urging suppression of constitutionally protected speech.

That position is hard to reconcile with the Supreme Court’s 1963 decision in Bantam Books v. Sullivan. In that case, the Court held that Rhode Island’s Commission to Encourage Morality in Youth had violated the First Amendment by pressuring book distributors to drop titles it deemed objectionable.

Notably, the commission itself had no enforcement authority, and at least some of the books it flagged did not meet the Supreme Court’s test for obscenity, meaning the distributors were not violating any law by selling them. The Court nevertheless concluded that the commission’s communications, which ostensibly sought voluntary “cooperation” but were “phrased virtually as orders,” were unconstitutional because they aimed to suppress disfavored speech and had that predictable result.

The Biden administration’s social media meddling bears a strong resemblance to the situation. But Fletcher argued that federal officials were simply using “the bully pulpit” to persuade platforms that they had a “responsibility” to curtail dangerous speech.

“Pressuring platforms in back rooms shielded from public view is not using the bully pulpit at all,” Aguinaga noted. “That’s just being a bully.”

Free Press, an inaptly named organization that aims to promote “positive social change, racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life,” warns that a ruling against the government “could allow social-media platforms to leave up misinformation.” In other words, a ruling for the government would empower it to define “misinformation” and require its removal — something the First Amendment plainly forbids.


About Jacob Sullum

Jacob Sullum is a senior editor at Reason magazine. Follow him on Twitter: @JacobSullum. During two decades in journalism, he has relentlessly skewered authoritarians of the left and the right, making the case for shrinking the realm of politics and expanding the realm of individual choice. Jacobs’ work appears here at AmmoLand News through a license with Creators Syndicate.

Jacob Sullum
Jacob Sullum