Radio America Online News Bureau

News & Politics

Mattis Gets Real, Nuking the Filibuster, Trump Vows Health Bill ‘Easy’

by

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America applaud Defense Secretary Jim Mattis for doing his best to limit civilian casualties while explaining that are often unavoidable in wartime as the U.S. dramatically ramps up the military action against ISIS.  They also discuss how Democrats are boxing themselves into a corner by trying to filibuster Neil Gorsuch – a move that could lead to rule changes that make the Democrats powerless to stop anything.  And they react to Pres. Trump telling senators a deal on health care legislation will be “easy.”

Standard Podcast [ 18:30 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Hoekstra: Bring in the Whistleblowers

by

The former chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence says it would be highly unusual for any raw intelligence transcripts to reach the White House, and he says if any “incidental” surveillance that did go to political operatives, then lawmakers should actively encourage and protect whistleblowers for coming forward.

This week, the current chairman of the committee, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., told President Trump and the media that he has seen evidence suggesting Trump associates and possibly even Trump himself were picked up communicating with foreign targets under U.S. surveillance.

Former Chairman Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., says the idea of transcripts from incidental surveillance ending up at the White House is stunning.

“My sources and what I gleaned from what Chairman Nunes said on Wednesday, it appears there was raw intelligence, actual transcripts of this incidental collection at the White House,” said Hoekstra, who notes that more corroboration needs to come forward to back up the claims from Nunes..

“It’s not that I was generally refused access to raw intelligence .  I never saw it.  I can’t remember one instance.  I checked with my legal counsel this morning just to make sure I hadn’t and said, ‘Is it true I never saw raw intelligence?’  He said, ‘ That’s right.  We never did,'” said Hoekstra.

Under normal circumstances, intelligence on American citizens uncovered by the intelligence community must meet very high standards to move anywhere along the government food chain.

“Number one, for it to see the light of day in any other agency, it has to reach a pretty high hurdle that says we’re going to share this information with other agencies but we’re going to mask the American presence,” said Hoekstra, referring to the practice of obscuring the identity of Americans involved with any foreign surveillance.

“The second thing then is to get those names unmasked.  That’s another high hurdle, because while it’s not illegally collected intelligence, it’s inappropriately collected intelligence because it’s outside of their charter,” said Hoekstra.

Government agencies like the CIA and NSA are forbidden by law from directly ordering surveillance on American citizens.

But with Nunes discussing evidence he has seen but does not have and the top Democrat on the committee focusing on alleged collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign, Hoekstra says getting people with direct knowledge of the issue to come forward and testify is essential.

But there’s a problem.

“The intelligence community has some of the weakest whistleblower protections anywhere in the federal government,” he said.

Nonetheless, Hoekstra says Nunes needs to make it safe for intelligence professionals to tell what they know.

“I would open the doors and get on TV and in the hearings and all of that, saying ‘If there are people in the intelligence community who believe that there were things that were done wrong, please come to the committee, bypass the whistleblower steps in the intelligence committee, and bring materials immediately to this committee.  We will protect you,'” said Hoekstra.

Hoekstra also hopes to see the intelligence committee put more heat on the key officials who addressed them this week.

“I would bring (NSA Director) Mike Rogers and I would bring (FBI Director) James Comey back.  I’m glad they’re coming back and I would nail them for what I believe is incomplete testimony last week,” said Hoekstra.

“For that (raw intelligence) information to have found its way to the White House.  I believe that James Comey and Mike Rogers of the NSA would both have known of that information being at the White House.  They should have shared that with the committee.  If anything, they led the committee in different directions,” said Hoekstra.

He points specifically to Comey denying evidence exists to support Trump’s tweet that Obama ordered him to be wiretapped.  Hoekstra says that allowed Comey to dodge the broader issue.

“In the larger context, it is people working on behalf of the president under the authority of the former president may have directly or indirectly surveilled his transition team .  Mr. Comey maybe should have been more open about that,” said Hoekstra.

Standard Podcast [ 9:28 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Three Martini Lunch 3/24/17

by

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America shake their heads as infighting among congressional Republicans and even White House staffers clouds the push for a vote.  They also cast suspicion on President Trump’s vow to just let Obamacare continue if Congress failed to pass the bill.  And they have some much needed fun by examining the push to rename the airport in Las Vegas for former Sen. Harry Reid.

Standard Podcast [ 15:38 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

‘One Way or Another, He Will Be Confirmed’

by

One of the Senate’s most conservative members says Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch showed lawmakers and the nation this week why he is a tremendous choice for the high court, while also rejecting the attempts of Democrats to discredit Gorsuch and promising President Trump’s choice will be confirmed.

Thursday was the third marathon day of questions for Gorsuch before the Senate Judiciary Committee.  Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, was already impressed with Gorsuch but says this week is further evidence Gorsuch belongs on the high court.

Lee says his biggest takeaway from the hearings is the consistency of Gorsuch.

“This judge is the same in every setting in which I’ve interacted with him, whether it’s in a courtroom when I was a lawyer, or whether it’s been in my office as he’s come by in anticipation of his confirmation process, or whether he’s on the hot seat in the Senate Judiciary Committee, where he’s been this week,” said Lee, who is a former federal prosecutor and argued cases before Gorsuch at the Tenth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

“He provides the same answers, the same thoughtful approach.  He doesn’t change from one moment to the next.  He’s considerate of the law.  He has great respect for the Constitution.  That’s exactly the kind of person we need on the Supreme Court,” said Lee.

Democrats spent three days prodding Gorsuch on everything from his own record to how Republicans treated Merrick Garland last year to his political opinions on issues that could come before the court.

Lee says Gorsuch handled the fire well.

“I think he handled every question that was thrown at him with grace and with a great deal of composure, even when things got heated,” said Lee.

Democrats are pursuing a number of strategies to slow down or stall Gorsuch.  That includes a call for a delay on final confirmation until the investigation into alleged ties between Russia and the Trump campaign concludes.

Lee is having none of that.

“I don’t see any reason, as much as some would like to delay this particular vote on him, this is something that doesn’t need to be affected by circumstances,” said Lee.

On Thursday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said he would vote to filibuster Gorsuch and would urge other Democrats to do the same.

Despite that effort, Lee thinks Gorsuch will sail past any filibuster.

“I think he’s going to get through.  I think he’s going to get through with, perhaps, a whole lot of Democratic support.  By the end of the hearing process, it felt like a love-fest, certainly on the Republican side of the aisle.  And I sensed a tone of resignation on the part of some of my Democratic colleagues on the committee,” said Lee.

Democrats changed Senate rules in recent years to kill the filibuster for all nominees except for those tapped for the Supreme Court.  Will Republicans change that rule if Democrats can muster a filibuster?

“Without engaging in hypothetical speculation about exactly what mechanism will be deployed here, I will say this very confidently, we’re going to get Judge Gorsuch confirmed.  One way or another, he will be confirmed,” vowed Lee.

During the hearings, Democrats deployed a number of strategies, starting with the complaint that the Supreme Court seat should already be filled by Judge Merrick Garland.  Garland was nominated by President Obama but Senate Republicans did not hold hearings or votes, contending the next president should get to make the choice.

Lee says it’s time for Democrats to move past the Garland controversy.

“Some of them can choose to be upset if they want to, but I think it would be best for everyone if we focused on what’s before us, what’s happening now rather than what happened a year ago.  If they look at this judge on the basis of his record, I think what they’re going to find is a sincere judge who just wants to find the right answer under the law,” said Lee.

Democrats also tried to get Gorsuch to speak out about his personal opinions on political issues that could wind up before the Supreme Court, including campaign financing and same-sex marriage.

While Gorsuch’s deflections frustrated Democrats, Lee says every nominee has taken the same approach in confirmation in recent years in order to maintain their impartiality.

“The fact that something like that comes up in a judicial confirmation hearing can itself be a cause for recusal if the judge engages in a significant discussion of the issue at hand.  If we’re not careful, this can end up undermining the ability of our Supreme Court justices to do their jobs,” said Lee,

“The fact that Democrats pushed Judge Gorsuch as often as they did, as many times as they did, to wade into as many hot-button controversies as they chose to do doesn’t change the fact this is the standard.  This is the rule and this has been the historical practice,”

In addition to seeking ammunition against Gorsuch, Lee says the political questions expose how Democrats seem to view the courts.

“They’re trying to make something where nothing really exists.  They’re trying to convert the Supreme Court, perhaps, into an organ of public policy making,” said Lee.

Standard Podcast [ 9:20 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Three Martini Lunch 3/23/17

by

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America are surprised by who is arrested for allegedly issuing scores of threats to Jewish Community Centers and other institutions. They also react to the details of the terrorist attack in London and shred the rationale behind radical Islamic terrorism. And they discuss North Korea being suspected of a massive heist of money from Bangladesh that was held in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York – and something about that story seems very familiar to them.

Standard Podcast [ 16:04 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

GOP Health Care Battle Heads to the Wire

by

President Trump and GOP leaders are furiously trying to find the votes necessary to pass the American Health Care Act, and while some news ‘yes’ votes are trickling in, the conservative pushback is also intensifying.

By most vote counts, Republicans are still a handful of votes away from being able to send the AHCA on to the Senate.  With all Democrats expected to oppose the bill, GOP leaders can only afford to lose 21 members on the final tally.  Unofficial whip counts in recent hours show 25-26 Republicans as firm or likely ‘no’ votes.  Sen. Rand Paul expects at least 35 Republicans to oppose it and predicts leaders will scratch the vote.

But Trump and GOP leaders have been able to sway a few more Republican votes to the ‘yes’ column, including Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif.

“We have to ask ourselves, if that’s all we get, does that give us a better system than the one we have right now?” said McClintock.  “It’s far, far from perfect, but it does move us in the right direction.  I am satisfied that, overall, it does give us a better system than the one we’ve got right now.”

McClintock believes Republican leaders made a mistake in insisting on moving a bill that does not address all needed solutions through the reconciliation process.

“The biggest problem is they’re using this convoluted process called reconciliation that doesn’t allow them to repeal the entire act, doesn’t allow them to replace the entire act and requires a lot of additional administrative regulations, which are going to be restricted by what the most liberal court in the country allows them to do, and by follow-up legislation whose future in the Senate is highly dubious,” said McClintock.

McClintock says Republicans and Democrats are responsible for the “convoluted” approach.

“Leadership chose that path precisely because of Democratic obstruction in the Senate.  The reconciliation process allows us to bypass that 60-vote cloture threshold and pass the bill with a simple 51 votes,” said McClintock.

However, he believes that a full repeal with all the market based reforms could pass the House and Senate if GOP leaders were willing to play hardball.

“I think the pressure on those eight Democratic holdouts would have been irresistible, particularly if (Senate Majority Leader) Mitch McConnell said, ‘If you want to filibuster this one, you’re going to have to actually go down there and filibuster it.  You’re going to have to stand by your desks and talk until you drop.  The record is 58 days.  Good luck breaking that.  When you’re done, we’re all going to vote,'” said McClintock.

However, McClintock says that option is off the table and he’s comfortable voting for the current bill.

“Those were arguments I made months ago and lost months ago.  We now have this bill in front of us and I think it more than merits an ‘aye’ vote,” he said.

McClintock wishes there were provisions in the bill allowing purchase of health insurance across state lines and that yanked out the Obamacare insurance regulations that are considered key drivers of premium and deductible increases.

But he says there is a lot to like in the bill as well.

“It ends the individual mandate that forces people to buy products they don’t want.  It ens the employer mandate that’s trapped a lot of low-income workers in part-time jobs.  It begins to restore consumers’ freedom of choice, which I think is the best guarantee of quality and value in any market,” said McClintock.

“It allows people to meet more of their health care needs with pre-tax dollars.  It relieves the premium base of the enormous cost of pre-existing conditions by moving those expenses to a block-granted assigned risk pool,” he added.

But while there are some notable improvements in the AHCA, for conservatives who have pushed “repeal and replace” since Obamacare became law seven years ago, the House bill simply fails to deliver on that promise.

“It’s good entitlement reforms in terms of some of the Medicaid reforms that are in the bill,” said Chris Jacobs, a former aide to Mike Pence and former Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, who is now senior health policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation and CEO of the Juniper Research Group.

“But I think it’s far short of a full repeal.  It leaves Obamacare’s architecture in place when it comes to all the mandates and the insurance regulations that are driving up premiums.  We need to repeal those mandates and go back to respecting state sovereignty and the states’ role in regulating health care and health insurance,” said Jacobs.

GOP leaders have characterized the AHCA as a binary choice for their colleagues: either support the bill or support the existing health care system by default.  Jacobs is not buying that argument.

“That’s a false choice, the idea that we must do something, that this is something therefore we must do this has a flaw in that logic,” said Jacobs.

Sponsors of the AHCA say getting rid of the insurance regulations or “Obamacare architecture” is outside the bounds of what can be moved through reconciliation.  Jacobs says the handling of this very bill proves that is not true.

“I understand the limitations of the reconciliation process, but you have to at least try to repeal the major insurance regulations that are in there.  The bill amends some of them, repeals some of them and leaves others in place.  It’s an ideologically inconsistent position,” said Jacobs.

“If your position is we can’t do any of this because of Senate procedures, then why are we repealing some of them and modifying some of them.  If you can modify them, you can repeal them,” he said.

McClintock finally got on board with the AHCA after successfully sponsoring an amendment in the House Budget Committee that would provide an additional $75 billion  to help people afford health insurance as they transition from Obamacare subsidies to tax credits if the new bill becomes law.  He is also confident that within a few years, Americans will start to see noticeable price decreases in health coverage.

But that same manager’s amendment that satisfied McClintock also contains language that could threaten benefits for up to seven million veterans.  Jacobs says the technical glitch in the language shows the need to slow down the rush to pass the legislation and avoid ugly surprises after it becomes law, similar to what occurred with Obamacare.

As the furious battle for votes plays out, Jacobs hopes leaders pull back and rework the bill to honor the original campaign promises.

“There are folks negotiating now as we speak in the Freedom Caucus to repeal some of the insurance regulations and the mandates.  Hopefully that succeeds and we get to a better bill that conservatives can support,” said Jacobs.

McClintock says Republicans should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

“When you pull together a group of people to benefit from their combined wisdom, unfortunately you’re also going to get their combined follies, prejudices and misjudgments.  You can never get a perfect product out of this process.  What you can get is the product that is the most acceptable and moves us forward,” said McClintock.

http://dateline.radioamerica.org/podcast/3-22-jacobs-blog.mp3 [ 11:34 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Standard Podcast [ 11:09 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Three Martini Lunch 3/22/17

by

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America shake their heads as Republicans fight over health care reform after telling Americans it would be easy to repeal and replace.  They’re also disgusted as school officials in Maryland seem far more concerned about protecting the reputation of illegal immigrants than condemning the rape of a 14-year-old girl, allegedly by two teens in the U.S. illegally.  And they get a kick out of Susan Rice lecturing the Trump administration about the importance of being honest and factual with the public and our allies.

Standard Podcast [ 20:14 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

‘Every American Should Be Absolutely Disgusted’

by

A new report shows the Department of Veterans Affairs is failing to answer calls on the Veteran Crisis Line, leaving many veterans waiting 30 minutes, a federal performance that one prominent veterans advocate says should leave the American people “disgusted.”

The VA’s own inspector general issued the report Monday.  First created in 2007, the Veterans Crisis Line is designed to have 10 percent or fewer of the calls roll over into overflow call centers.  However, from April through November of 2016, 28.4 percent of calls went to those call centers, with many waiting 30 minutes for someone to speak to them.  In October, the rate was 34.9 percent.

“It’s disgusting.  Every American should be absolutely disgusted with this rate for a suicide hotline.  I’m just kind of numb to a point where the VA is just the gift that keeps on giving when it comes to giving me an opportunity to come out ans scream and yell,” said retired U.S. Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant Jessie Jane Duff, who is now a senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research.

“I am frustrated beyond belief.  I understand this is a new administration.  I’m willing to give the new secretary of the Veterans Administration an opportunity to correct these issues.  But I do hope that bringing this forward in the first 50 some odd days of this administration, they’d take it very seriously,” said Duff.

She says veteran suicides are a major problem and forcing vets in crisis to wait long periods is not helpful.

“They have 20 veterans a day killing themselves.  Twenty veterans a day; this is by the VA’s own stats themselves.  So then to put them on hold for 30 minutes.  Do you not think that’s not potentially contributing to the suicide rate?” asked Duff.

The report also shows the VA is distorting the wait time for veterans by declaring that calls forwarded to overflow centers are never really on hold.

“To have them wait 30 minutes is ridiculous.  And then the excuses they give.  They said they’re not being put on hold because they were re-routed to an overflow center.  They said, ‘Well, we didn’t put them on hold.’  Quit patting yourself on the back.  To a caller, that was waiting 30 minutes.  In that time they could have pulled the trigger or driven off the bridge,” said Duff.

Deflecting blame infuriates Duff as much as the incompetence.

“Who is going to be held accountable for this.  The staff obviously doesn’t get fired.  There’s obviously minimal recourse for the veterans who are left on hold.  What are they left to do.  Reporting it doesn’t seem to be getting them anywhere,” said Duff.

Duff says this seems like an easy fix.

“You would have to centralize where this system is located and you would have to enable it with an efficient and effective staff.  They should be like a 911 call center.  911 does not place you on hold.  It’s as simple as that.  It should be considered an emergency,” said Duff.

Duff says something like this should be effectively addressed in three months or less.  She also wants the VA to focus on care for veterans instead of trying to take away their second amendment rights because they’ve been deemed mentally incapable of handling their own financial affairs.  The Justice Department imposed such an order and legislation is now underway to reverse that ruling.

“Mentally defective does not equate suicide, and if the VA cares so much about suicide, why aren’t they answering their phones,” said Duff.

When it comes to confronting union and freeing up the VA secretary to remove ineffective or incompetent personnel, Duff wants to see major results within a year.  She says Secretary David Shulkin deserves a chance to do the job, but she says results should determine how long he stays there.

“For the bigger things. I expect (results) in a year.  I’m not even talking midterms.  If this doesn’t get corrected, somebody needs to be removed from this position and we need someone who’s willing to do the deep dive and go in there and dig,” said Duff.

Standard Podcast [ 13:00 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Three Martini Lunch 3/21/17

by

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America get a kick out of Dianne Feinstein declaring Roe v. Wade of being a “superprecedent.”  They’re also frustrated as the VA’s inspector general shows far too many veterans are being forced to wait a long time on the Veterans Crisis Line.  And they weigh in on the Blaze suspending Tomi Lahren for telling ‘The View’ that being pro-choice is consistent with conservatism.

Standard Podcast [ 21:13 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

‘Let’s Do What We Said, Let’s Repeal Obamacare’

by

Republican leaders are hoping to pass their health care replacement plan on Thursday, but the conservative sponsor of legislation to fully repeal the Affordable Care Act says the current GOP preserves far too much of the current system and must be rejected.

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, is also a co-founder and former chairman of the House Freedom Caucus and has introduced legislation to fully repeal the Affordable Care Act, also known as the ACA or Obamacare.  Jordan is vigorously opposed to the current version of American Health Care Act, arguing this is not what Republicans promised voters since 2010.

“We’re not repealing Obamacare.  Even people who are for it, like Charles Krauthammer, has said it’s Obamacare-lite.  It keeps the Obamacare structure and that’s not what we told the voters.  If you don’t repeal Obamacare, you’re never going to bring down the cost of insurance for middle class and working class families,” said Jordan.

“So it is really that basic.  Let’s do what we said.  That’s what they sent us here to do.  Let’s actually repeal Obamacare.  A clean and complete repeal is what we’re after.  This doesn’t do it,” said Jordan.

The American Health Care Act, or AHCA, is vigorously endorsed by President Trump and House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisc.  Ryan argues the plan does fulfill the promise to repeal and replace Obamacare.

Jordan laid out several areas he insists are key differences between a complete repeal and what the GOP plan does.

“We didn’t tell voters we were going to repeal Obamacare but we were going to keep some of the taxes in place, which the speaker’s plan does.  We didn’t say we were going to repeal Obamacare but take the Medicaid expansion and extend it for several years, which the speaker’s plan does,” said Jordan.

“We certainly didn’t say we’re going to repeal Obamacare and start this new program of refundable tax credits and repeal Obamacare and get rid of the mandate but keep this 30 percent surcharge that we tell insurance companies you have to levy on people who don’t maintain continuous coverage,” said Jordan.

The most disturbing issue for Jordan is Republicans getting ready to own a massive health care reform that he believes will not lower the cost of health insurance.

“This is just Obamacare in a different format, and because of that it will not bring down the cost of insurance.  It will not bring down premiums.  Therefore, middle class families are still going to see the ridiculous high levels they’ve seen over the last several years,” said Jordan.

Jordan and several other members of the House Freedom Caucus are demanding a full repeal of Obamacare, just as the GOP-controlled Congress did in 2015 before the legislation was vetoed by President Obama.

“The one thing we know about our plan is it’s passed before,” said Jordan.

So why won’t leaders bring up that same bill?

“They’re saying some people may not vote for that, which is amazing to me.  During election time you can do one thing, but once you get in office and it actually counts you can’t?  That’s what drives voters crazy,” said Jordan.

Jordan also doesn’t buy the GOP leadership’s three-step approach to reform, which includes this bill, letting Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price roll back many of the regulations in the current law and then passing market-based reforms in a separate bill that will likely require 60 votes to clear the Senate.

“That’s a joke,” said Jordan.

“We know phase two is going to get tied up in court.  You saw what the courts have done on President Trump’s executive order on the travel ban.  You’ve seen how he reworked it and came back with something we know is consistent with the law.  And where is that right now?  It’s tied up in court.  So to think the left is not going to take Obamacare and tie it up in court is just ridiculous,” said Jordan.

As frustrating as it has been for full repeal proponents to plead their case with leadership, Jordan says the difference between conservatives and Democrats on the issue is like night and day.

“They view success as signing people up for government, Medicaid or Obamacare.  We define success as let’s put in place the policies that make insurance affordable so that people can pick the plan that meets their needs.  That’s what we’re trying to get accomplished,” said Jordan.

While Trump is vociferously supporting the GOP plan, Jordan is hopeful the president will be able to broker changes to the legislation that will rid the law of crippling insurance regulations dictating what has to be in all policies, allow for market based reforms that will drive competition and lower costs and repeal other burdensome regulations by statute.

Jordan, who met with Trump along with other Freedom Caucus members, says the White House has been far more accommodating than Republican leaders in Congress.

“We appreciate the outreach the White House did being willing to work with us.  Our leadership initially talked about this binary choice, take-it-or-leave-it approach, which I don’t think is helpful.  Since then I think they’ve been more open to talk with us, probably driven by the fact they don’t have the votes,” said Jordan.

With a vote planned for Thursday, Jordan suspects a scramble is underway to find more support for the AHCA.

“One thing I learned a long time ago is when leadership is out there saying they have the votes, that means they probably don’t have the votes.  Based on what I know from our members of the Freedom Caucus and some other people, I believe they do not have the votes, so we’ll see how negotiations go this week,” said Jordan.

Standard Podcast [ 10:08 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share