May 2017
« Apr    
PAYPAL Donations

The The Highlands Tea Party relies on your generous donations to keep the candle of liberty burning while we work tirelessly to reign in our out of control government, educate our Patriots on the latest issues,

We are a non-profit organization financed BY donations & occasional Raffles. >strong>No special interest funding our efforts. Your donations make a difference.

Donations are not tax-deductible.

Please consider a monthly donation; Click on the PayPal Button to contribute with PayPal

Donating by PayPal is Safe and Convenient

Please send checks to the address below,

Send Checks to: The Highlands Tea Party 4196 Smoke signal Sebring, FL 33872

All donations are greatly appreciated, Thank You & God Bless

My God! How little do my countrymen know what precious blessings they are in possession of, and which no other people on earth enjoy! ~Thomas Jefferson

General information

Archive for the ‘2 – Capitol Hill News’ Category

For the Record: Democrats Called For Last 4 GOP Presidents To be Impeached

While the lying mainstream makes it seem that Democrats are onto something with impeachment talk of President Trump, they fail to show that Democrats have called for the impeachment of GOP presidents in ‘81, ’83, ’84, ’91, ’04, ‘05, and ‘07.
Investors Business Daily reported:

The fact that some Democrats are already calling for the impeachment of President Trump is hardly news. What is news is the fact that even some ardent liberals are worried that reflexively jumping on the impeachment bandwagon is folly.

According to a list compiled by CNN, 27 Democrats have so far come out in favor of impeaching Trump. What they don’t provide is context. For 36 years, Democrats have routinely called for impeaching Republican presidents at the drop of a hat.

Here is a sampling:

On May 1, 1981, thousands of protesters marched in Washington to denounce President Reagan’s economic and social policies. The event was billed as ”Days of Resistance to Roll Back Reaganism.” (Sound familiar?) At the event, at least two speakers called for impeaching Reagan.

”Our purpose is to turn this country around,” one said. ”Getting rid of Reagan is the first step.”

In early 1983, Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., said Reagan should be impeached “for incompetence.” Later that year, he called for impeaching Reagan over his military action in Grenada.

Jesse Jackson wanted Reagan impeached in 1984 for mining Nicaragua’s harbors. Texas Rep. Henry Gonzalez and six other Democrats introduced a resolution to impeach Reagan in 1987 over the Iran-Contra affair…

Democratic politicians know that President Trump is being very effective at implementing his campaign promises and they will do whatever is necessary to stop him. They do not care about America!


 Joel B. Pollak @joelpollak

Dems called for impeachment of GOP presidents in: ‘81, ’83, ’84, ’91, ’04, ‘05, and ‘07 – IBD 
Photo published for Democrats Want To Impeach A Republican President? What Else Is New?
Democrats Want To Impeach A Republican President? What Else Is New?
Politics: The fact that some Democrats are already calling for the impeachment of President Trump is hardly news. What is news is the fact that even some ardent liberals are worried that reflexively…

Flynn to invoke Fifth Amendment, rebuff Senate panel subpoena

Image result for fox news logo

Image result for pictures of Michael Flynn

Former national security adviser Michael Flynn plans to invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and rebuff a Senate panel subpoena, Fox News confirms.
Flynn’s decision comes less than two weeks after the Senate intelligence committee issued a subpoena for Flynn’s documents as part of the panel’s investigation into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election.
Sources close to Flynn emphasized that the decision is not evidence of guilt or wrongdoing.
Experts say records can be viewed as testimony and that providing them could be seen as waiving Fifth Amendment constitutional protections.
Flynn has previously sought immunity from “unfair prosecution” to cooperate with the committee.
The Senate committee is one of several congressional inquiries investigating Russian meddling in the 2016 race and possible collusion between Russia and President Trump’s 2016 campaign. Flynn is also the target of other congressional investigations as well as an ongoing FBI counterintelligence probe and a separate federal investigation in Virginia.


GOP senator: Flynn ‘not cooperating’ in Russia probe

GOP senator: Flynn ‘not cooperating’ in Russia probe

Former national security advisor Michael Flynn is not cooperating with the Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation into Russian election interference, Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said Thursday.  Burr initially said Flynn was not complying with a subpoena issued by the committee before quickly walking back his remarks to reporters.
While Flynn “is not cooperating” so far, Burr said, he hasn’t gotten a “definitive” answer from Flynn’s lawyers.  “I may have been premature,” Burr said. “There may be a day or two left.”  Flynn’s lawyer did not immediately respond to a request for comment or confirmation.  The demand is for documents related to the committee’s investigation into Russian interference in the presidential election.
Flynn — the former intelligence officer who was fired in February for misleading Vice President Pence and other White House officials about the contents of a December phone call with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak — has been under scrutiny for accepting payments from Russia and Turkey and allegedly misleading the government about them.


MUELLER TAKING OVER: Former FBI Chief to oversee Russia election investigation as special counsel

Special Investigation, for what reason?

Comey said he was not investigating Trump, they now know that the Murdered Rich Seth was the person sending the information to WIKI LEAKS just as Julian Assange stated many times over, “I am not getting my information from the Russians”.  The Clinton campaign is somehow involved in this Murder of Rich Seth;  people generally do not just wander around in the middle of the night, walk up and kill someone for no reason.  Nothing taken from his body, this was a contracted killing, why aren’t they looking into to that. Where are the body camera pictures of the investigating officers?  Why is the Washington D.C. police not doing an investigation?  The Clinton campaign found  out Rich Seth was the culprit but wanted to quiet him so they could keep the Russian conspiracy going to blame Trump, this you could almost take to the bank.
Why didn’t the Clinton campaign allow the FBI to look at their computer that was hacked? They had a private company do it,  then told the FBI it  “looked like the Russians did it”, reason was the fact that they already knew it was Rich Seth, but had not done anything about it.
The FBI nor any other intelligence agency ever did an independent assessment of the organization’s breached servers. Instead, they alleged, the FBI relied exclusively on information from private digital forensics company Crowdstrike   Whether the DNC was hacked is not in doubt. On that point the DNC and FBI agree that the hack happened.  Really?  How can the FBI state that a Hack happened if they never had access to the system to investigate it??  CrowdStrike revealed an intrusion,  had no identity as to who or where it came from,  they did not make a statement that it was a Russian hack..
Comments likeplausible that Russians hacked“,   “There are good reasons to believe Russians had something to do with the breaches into email accounts”,  “remains possible that Russia itself ordered it”  “No one has actually proven that group is the Russian government (or works for it)”  We should also bear in mind that private security firm CrowdStrike’s who cited findings of Russian responsibility were paid for by the DNC, it’s highly unusual for evidence of a crime to be assembled on the victim’s dime.
Look more closely at the information quoted above, and you can’t help but notice all of the qualifying words: Possibly, Possible, appears, connects, indicates, Good Reasons, they alleged. looked like,
These  kind of  statements  are not what you base a World wide investigation on, you have to have facts first the proceed. This Independent investigator business is a total waste of American money and in the end will most likely  come to the conclusion  there is no data to support that the Russians had anything to do with it. 
Time will tell, but when; t the end of the trump Term? it seems it takes to government years to investigate these thing, take the Clinton servers,, Benghazi, Fast & furious gun running,  years of investigation and no one was ever charged  for the crimes committed, and people were killed 5 to be exact..  Appears that Washington D.C government employees are above the laws of the normal American citizen.
This is all very suspicious, a major Cover up which D.C is famous for,  this needs to be looked into by the special Prosecutor more so than the Far out possibility of Russian hacking, or Russian involvement into the election, which probably did not even exist..
Even Clapper has stated many times there was no collusion on the part of the Trump team with the Russians .
Webmaster Commentary
Mueller is a former FBI director; John Roberts has the roundup on 'Special Report'
The Justice Department announced Wednesday it has appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as a special counsel to oversee a federal investigation into the probe of alleged Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election.
The appointment came amid a growing Democratic outcry for someone outside the Justice Department to handle the politically charged investigation.
“In my capacity as acting Attorney General, I determined that it is in the public interest for me to exercise my authority and appoint a Special Counsel to assume responsibility for this matter,” Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said in a statement. “My decision is not a finding that crimes have been committed or that any prosecution is warranted.”
The appointment gives Mueller, who led the FBI through the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and served under presidential administrations of both parties, sweeping powers to investigate whether Trump campaign associates colluded with the Kremlin to influence the outcome in his behalf, as well as the authority to prosecute any crimes uncovered during the probe.
“I accept this responsibility and will discharge it to the best of my ability,” Mueller said in a statement
The broad mandate, beyond any specific Trump-Russia connection, also covers “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.”  Senior DOJ officials told Fox News the White House was informed of the decision for a special counsel after the order had been signed, through the White House Counsel’s office, about an hour before the decision went public.
“As I have stated many times, a thorough investigation will confirm what we already know – there was no collusion between my campaign and any foreign entity,” President Trump said in a statement in reaction to the DOJ announcement. “I look forward to this matter concluding quickly.  In the meantime, I will never stop fighting for the people and the issues that matter most to the future of our country.”




Vladimir Putin Putin on Trump-Lavrov meeting: I’ll hand over records

Vladimir Putin

Putin on Trump-Lavrov meeting: I’ll hand over records

Vladimir Putin offered Wednesday to help settle the controversy over claims President Trump shared classified intel with Russian diplomats.
Railing against “dangerous” U.S. politicians whipping up “anti-Russian sentiment,” the Russian president dismissed the claim that Trump disclosed such information to Kremlin officials and offered to hand over records of an Oval Office meeting to Congress.
Speaking during a joint news conference with the Italian prime minister, Putin said those attacking Trump for allegedly being too cozy with Russian politicians were guilty of “political schizophrenia.”
Putin said – if the White House agreed – that he would share his records of a meeting Trump had last week with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Ambassador Sergei Kislyak in which it was reported Trump blurted out sensitive information given to the White House by Israeli intelligence. Making light of the situation, Putin said he would have to reprimand Lavrov since the alleged intelligence was never passed along to him.
“He hasn’t shared those secrets with us,” Putin said.


Tillerson, McMaster deny report Trump shared classified information with Russia

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster denied a report that President Trump shared highly classified information with Russian government officials during an Oval Office meeting last week.
“During President Trump’s meeting with Foreign Minister Lavrov, a broad range of subjects were discussed among which were common efforts and threats regarding counter-terrorism,” Tillerson told reporters at the White House Monday evening. “During that exchange, the nature of specific threats were discussed, but they did not discuss sources, methods or military operations.
“McMaster attended the meeting and also pushed back against the reports of Trump’s comments to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak.
“The story that came out tonight as reported is false. The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats to our two countries, including threats to civil aviation. At no time, at no time, were intelligence sources or methods discussed and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not already publicly known,” McMaster said in a press conference Monday evening.



The Hill Tipsheet

President Trump is escalating his public feud with former FBI director James Comey.  Under siege in the media and on Capitol Hill, Trump on Friday morning lobbed a direct threat at the former director, tweeting that Comey “better hope that there are no ‘tapes’ of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!”
Trump has gotten little support as he has ramped up the fight.
Read the full story here
Trump’s warning to Comey deepens White House crisis
By Jordan Fabian
President Trump added fuel to the fire engulfing his White House on Friday by warning now-fired FBI Director James Comey not to reveal anything about their conversations.
Read the full story here
Four candidates interviewing for FBI director job Saturday
By Mark Hensch
Acting FBI Director James McCabe and Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) are among four candidates interviewing Saturday to serve as the FBI’s permanent director, a source told The Hill.
Read the full story here
 Trump: ‘I don’t think it’s inappropriate’ asking for FBI chief’s loyalty
By Mark Hensch
President Trump argued Friday that there is nothing “inappropriate” about asking for the FBI director’s loyalty, while denying that he made such a demand before firing former director James Comey.
Read the full story here
Treasury Dept. to share Trump-Russia info for Senate probeBy Brandon Carter
The Treasury Department’s financial crimes unit will share information requested by the Senate Intelligence Committee as part of its investigation into potential ties between President Trump’s campaign and Russia, according to multiple reports Friday.
Read the full story here
Gates on Comey: Trump should’ve had his ‘ducks in a row’
By Mark Hensch
Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates says in an interview airing this weekend that President Trump’s firing of former FBI Director James Comey was “not terribly well done.”
Read the full story here
 Feinstein: Deputy AG should name special prosecutor or resign
By Jordain Carney
A second key Senate Democrat, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), is calling on Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to resign if he does not name a special prosecutor to handle the investigation into Russia’s election interference.
Read the full story here
Deputy AG sees no need for special prosecutor on Russia: report
By Mark Hensch
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein doesn’t find it necessary at this point to appoint a special prosecutor to probe Russia’s interference in the presidential election, CNN reported Friday, citing sources familiar with his thinking.
Read the full story here
Warren rips Trump in commencement speech: No one is above the law
By Jordain Carney
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) took multiple swipes at President Trump during a commencement address Friday, days after he fired FBI Director James Comey. “Fireball is a nickname Donald Trump uses on Twitter, not a beverage to be consumed by distinguished college graduates,” she said.
Read the full story here
 Global ransomware attack using stolen NSA tool hits 74 countries
By Joe Uchill
A massive international ransomware campaign apparently using hacking tools stolen from the NSA struck computers across the world Friday, shuttering British hospitals and hobbling a Spanish telecom.
Read the full story here
 The New York Times: ‘Looking like a liar or a fool’: What it means to work for Trump
By Glenn Thrush and Maggie Haberman
President Trump has never shown any reluctance to sacrifice a surrogate to serve a short-term political need, so he apparently did not think twice this week about exposing a series of staff members to ridicule as he repeatedly shifted his explanation for firing James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director.
Read the full story here
Reuters: After tough week, Trump looks for a lift at Liberty University
By Roberta Rampton
President Donald Trump on Saturday is set to deliver the commencement address – his first as president – to Liberty University, the nation’s largest Christian college, where he is expected to find to a friendly audience after a week of turmoil in Washington.
Read the full story here
The Washington Post: Trump has a long history of secretly recording calls, according to former associates
By Marc Fisher
Throughout Donald Trump’s business career, some executives who came to work for him were taken aside by colleagues and warned to assume that their discussions with the boss were being recorded
Read the full story here
 The Associated Press: After Comey firing, Trump’s frustrations boiled over
By Julie Pace and Jonathan Lemire
After four months in office, President Donald Trump has become distrustful of some of his White House staff, heavily reliant on a handful of family members and longtime aides, and furious that the White House’s attempts to quell the firestorm over the FBI and congressional Russia investigations only seem to add more fuel.
Read the full story here
The Wall Street Journal: U.S.-China trade plan marks key first step
By William Mauldin
An initial trade framework between the U.S. and China shows that President Donald Trump is willing to put aside his tough rhetoric and accept a limited deal with Beijing in a bid for more substantial agreements down the road.
Read the full story here


Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on Cyber Command. Adm Rogers, Sen McCain

Graham Questions NSA Director Admiral Rogers on U.S. Cyber Threats


Graham Questions NSA Director On Russia, Unmasking

Wednesday, May 10th, 2017
U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) today questioned Director of the National Security Agency (NSA) Admiral Michael Rogers on Russia’s interference in American politics and the practice of unmasking the identities of American citizens mentioned in intelligence reports.
GRAHAM: “Do you agree that it was Democrats in 2016, it could be Republicans in the next election?
ROGERS: “Yes, I would argue this is not about politics. This is not about party. This is about an effort against the strategic interests of every citizen of this nation.”
GRAHAM: “I agree with you one thousand percent.”
GRAHAM: “How many people can request the unmasking of American citizens?”
ROGERS: “If you’re an authorized recipient of the intelligence – we use two criteria. Number one, the requester must be asking this in the execution of their official duties. It can’t be something that would be neat to know… Number two, the revealing of the U.S. person has to provide context and greater value for the intelligence. Again, it just can’t be, ‘I’m just curious.’”
GRAHAM: “So there’s a record of who made the request to unmask the conversation involving the American citizen?”
ROGERS: “Yes sir.”
GRAHAM: “There’s a record of whether or not you granted it.”
ROGERS: “Yes sir.”
GRAHAM: “Is there a record of what the person did with the information once they got it?”
ROGERS: “No. There is also a record of the basis of, ‘so why did we say yes?’”


  • Aetna CEO: ObamaCare will continue to deteriorate if nothing happens. (The Washington Free Beacon)
  • ObamaCare is dying in Maryland too, and it isn’t Trump’s or Republicans’ fault. (Washington Examiner)
  • Comey: 15% of terror cases came as refugees. (National Review)
  • Texas concealed carry holder thwarts potential mass shooting. (The Daily Signal)
  • RIP Bob Owens, Second Amendment champion. (Townhall)
  • Hispanic Phoenix serial killer suspect arrested. (Fox News)
  • Trump military advisers want 3,000 more troops to fight Taliban. (Daily Beast)
  • Constituent graft runs deep: Trump’s agriculture secretary, Sonny Perdue, declares that “ethanol is here to stay.” (Washington Examiner)
  • Why DeVos should rescind Obama’s ban on disciplining black kids in school. (The Federalist)
  • Theology professor pressured out of Duke after protesting liberal racism “training” program. (The Washington Times)
  • Policy: A guide to tax reform in the 115th Congress. (Heritage Foundation)
  • Policy: The debt-bubble landmine Obama left for Trump. (New York Post)
For more, visit Patriot Headline Report.
Comment | Share
Don’t Miss Patriot Humor

Yates warned Flynn was vulnerable to blackmail by Russia

Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., left, and Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., question the Republican side as the panel meets to advance the nomination of President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch, Monday, April 3, 2017, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) ** FILE **

Former acting Attorney General Sally Yates warned the White House that former national security adviser Michael Flynn created a “compromise situation” and could have been “blackmailed,” she said Monday.
“We weren’t the only ones that knew all of this,” Yates said Monday, referring to the revelation that Flynn misled Vice President Pence about the true content of a December call with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. “The Russians also knew about what General Flynn had done. The Russians also knew that General Flynn had misled the vice president and others.”
“This was a problem because not only do we believe that the Russians knew this, but that they likely had proof of this information — and that created a compromise situation, where the national security advisor essentially could be blackmailed by the Russians,” she said.
While the Justice Department’s concerns about Flynn have previously been reported, this is the first time Yates has discussed the concerns in public.
She did so at a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing that received wall-to-wall coverage on cable news.
Her basic message: The Justice Department was worried that President Trump’s national security adviser could be blackmailed by Russia.

Read more from The Hill:

Live coverage: Sally Yates testifies before Senate Judiciary panel

Trump administration plans religious liberty executive action

by Sarah Westwood |
Image result for trump signing EOsPresident Trump will sign an executive action on Thursday aimed at removing regulations that apply to religious organizations, a senior administration official said on Wednesday.  “It declares that it is a policy of the administration … to protect and vigorously promote religious liberty,” the senior administration official said. “It directs the IRS to exercise the maximum enforcement discretion to alleviate the burden of the Johnson Amendment.”
The Johnson Amendment is a provision of the tax code that prevents nonprofit organizations, including churches and religious groups, from backing political candidates.  Trump has said he wants to repeal the Johnson Amendment to give religious organizations more free speech rights. His executive action on Thursday is also expected to offer “regulatory relief for religious objecters” to provisions of Obamacare, the official said.  Critics have questioned whether policies aimed at religious freedom could lead to discrimination against the gay community by giving non-religious businesses legal cover to withhold services from gay patrons.
But proponents have argued Obama-era laws discriminated against Christians by forcing them to participate in activities that violated their beliefs, such as providing wedding services for same-sex couples or buying health insurance plans that fund contraceptives.  “This EO isn’t about discrimination,” the senior administration official said. “We don’t have any plans to discriminate. We’re about not discriminating against religious organizations.”



It’s Time For McConnell To Go
Published on on May 3, 2017

There is no greater act of deceit and chicanery than when Republican Senators like Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Roy Blunt of Missouri, and Susan Collins of Maine claim, on the one hand, to be strong opponents of abortion, determined advocates of less spending, and strong opponents of ObamaCare, but, on the other, defenders of the filibuster rule that makes sure these policies will never pass the Senate.

The 60-vote threshold for ending debate in the Senate will block immigration enforcement, tax cuts, Obamacare repeal, and every other Republican bill.

But Majority Leader McConnell zealously defends the filibuster saying that it keeps the Senate as the deliberative branch of Congress.  He essentially maintains that it is nobody’s business if it remains in place blocking all legislation. “Senate rules are a matter for the Senate and a lot of other people have opinions.”

If McConnell won’t get out of the way, it is time to get rid of McConnell as majority leader.  This one man cannot be allowed to stand in the way of the desires of the entire Republican electorate and the Republican president simply because he wants to maintain the Senate’s traditions.

Message to McConnell: It’s an elected Senate, not the House of Lords.



Trump defends $1 trillion budget bill in face of conservative fury


President Trump on Tuesday defended the controversial $1 trillion-plus budget deal heading for a vote – as he and congressional Republicans face conservative anger at what critics see as a cave to Democrats on everything from sanctuary cities to funding for Planned Parenthood.   “The reason for the plan negotiated between the Republicans and Democrats is that we need 60 votes in the Senate which are not there!” Trump tweeted, adding that the solution is to elect more Republican senators in 2018 “or change the rules” of the Senate filibuster.
He added a warning shot: “Our country needs a good ‘shutdown’ in September to fix mess!”
Republican and Democratic lawmakers made the budget deal, announced Monday, in order to fund the government through September and avoid a shutdown later this week. But despite Republicans controlling the House, Senate and White House, the deal is widely perceived as benefiting Democratic interests and priorities, while sidelining some of the items on Trump’s wishlist.   Heritage Action, an outside conservative group, on Tuesday urged a “no” vote on the package, with Heritage Foundation analysts claiming it “woefully fails the test of fiscal responsibility and does not advance important conservative policies.”
The plan has no funding for Trump’s much vaunted border wall, though it includes $1.5 billion for border security.   While the deal does include an increase in military spending as requested by Trump, it does not reduce funding for so-called “sanctuary cities” – jurisdictions that refuse to comply with federal immigration law – and continues to fund abortion provider Planned Parenthood.



Why This Judge’s Ruling Won’t Block Federal Action on Sanctuary Cities

Hans von Spakovsky / / /

Media sources are all breathlessly reporting that the Trump administration’s proposed termination of federal funding to sanctuary cities has been enjoined by a federal judge.   But that is misleading, and the media is misinterpreting the injunction order in the same way the federal judge misinterpreted President Donald Trump’s executive order.
At issue in the lawsuit filed in San Francisco federal court by Santa Clara County and San Francisco was Section 9 of Executive Order 13768, “Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States.”
If you read all of the news accounts, as well as the order of Judge William Orrick (an Obama appointee), you would think that Trump ordered the cutoff of all federal funding to sanctuary cities, from basic federal entitlement payments like Medicaid to discretionary grants.
Orrick even recites, for example, the $1.7 billion in “federal and federally dependent funds” Santa Clara County got in 2015-2016, which he acknowledges “includes federal funds provided through entitlement programs.”   But Section 9 does not affect federal entitlement programs. It is very narrowly focused. It states that it is the policy of the executive branch to ensure compliance “to the fullest extent of the law … with 8 U.S.C. 1373.”


Senators get North Korea briefing in unusual WH visit

Senators piled into buses Wednesday for a rare trip to the Eisenhower Executive Office Building next to the White House for a closed-door briefing on North Korea.  The meeting comes as President Trump nears his 100th day in office with few legislative accomplishments. It also marks the first time the president has met with the full Senate since his joint address in February.
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, noted that the trip across Pennsylvania Avenue marked an “unusual setting.”  “In my congressional career, there’s never been a similar type of meeting held at the White House,” he told reporters. “[But] I don’t want to read too much into this.”
Top administration officials, including Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, briefed the senators. Trump briefly stopped by the meeting, which had originally been expected to take place at the Capitol.  “He welcomed senators to the White House. It was encouraging to see virtually every senator there, both Democrats and Republicans, and it was a long and detailed briefing,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said after the meeting.
The administration has pledged to take a hard line with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un amid escalating tensions with the isolated country over its nuclear program after a failed missile launch last week.  In an apparent show of force, the U.S. submarine USS Michigan arrived in South Korea this week. Tillerson is expected to chair a special meeting on North Korea at the United Nations Security Council on Friday.  Senators said after the meeting that they expected the administration to step up pressure on North Korea, including pressing China and others in the region to take a tougher stance against the country.
“I don’t want to get into the details of the briefing itself, but I think it’s clear that they are going to take more steps, and steps to pressure China as well as others in the region, to get the results we need, which is peaceful denuclearization,” Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said.


Republicans have the controls use them.

Senate GOP LeadershipFellow Conservative:

Republican leaders will have an opportunity this week to cut liberal spending and advance conservative priorities. For years, these leaders said they needed control of the White House to win spending fights with the Democrats, and now they have it.

The time for excuses is over.

Congress will consider legislation this week to extend government funding beyond April 28th, and Republicans should use this bill to advance conservative reforms and protect American taxpayers.   Republicans should include the $1.4 billion President Trump requested for the border wall. This was a major campaign promise and it’s central to controlling our borders.  Republicans should also defund Planned Parenthood, sanctuary cities, refugee resettlement, the Iran nuclear deal, and Obamacare – all things they say they oppose but refused to defund while President Obama was in office.

Democrats have threatened to block government funding and cause a shutdown if they don’t get their way in this debate, but Republicans should not surrender the power of the purse.   Punting on these priorities will break promises made to taxpayers and embolden the Democrats to block them in the future. Now is the time for Republicans to draw a line in the sand.   Americans did not elect Republicans to the House, Senate, and White House so Democrats could continue to control government funding. If Democrats cause a shutdown to block these reforms, that’s a debate Republicans should welcome and do everything they can to win.

Now is not the time to surrender.

What do you think? Please answer our grassroots budget survey and see the instant results.

We’re grateful for your feedback and support.

Ken Cuccinelli II
Ken Cuccinelli II
Senate Conservatives Action

Please share this on Facebook and Twitter.

How Washington Handed Trump His First Defeat

Column: Health legislation failed because Republicans (RYAN) put procedure ahead of policy


Trump Oval Office
President Trump and his advisers ought to study the collapse of the American Health Care Act. It’s a case study in how Beltway institutions—the so-called Swamp Trump pledged to drain—can herd a president and his party toward unpopular legislation and political defeat.
Begin with this question: Why the rush to repeal and replace Obamacare? Yes, repealing the law has been a Republican priority since 2010. But Democrats had spent decades laying the groundwork for universal health care before finding themselves in control of the government in 2009. And even then, it took a year for the Affordable Care Act to be signed into law. Republican leadership unveiled a plan and gave the caucus very little time to influence it before calling for a vote. They did so because repealing and replacing Obamacare would give them more leeway to cut tax rates down the line. The legislative schedule determined policy. Not a good idea.
The objective of the American Health Care Act was not to write into law the best possible conservative reform of health care. While I happen to think the bill had plenty of good stuff in it, its main purpose was to overcome a Democratic filibuster in the Senate. That’s why the bill failed to overturn Obamacare’s regulatory structure: House leadership didn’t believe such reforms could pass the watchful eye of the Senate Parliamentarian. And when, late in the process, Senator Mike Lee of Utah suggested that the parliamentarian would allow deregulation in the bill, the situation became even more confusing.


Why Americans can’t afford to ignore the border adjustment tax


Why Americans can’t afford to ignore the border adjustment taxWith Congress returning from Easter recess next week, the debate over the border adjustment tax (B.A.T.) rages on. The most recent claim by supporters is that it’s unfair to focus on the 20 percent tax hike on all imports—including finished products, intermediate parts, or raw materials—without also accounting for the benefits of other proposals included in the House Republican tax reform plan.
In other words, pay no attention to the new, trillion-dollar tax behind the curtain.
In reality, Americans simply can’t afford to ignore the impact this devastating proposed tax would have on their businesses and family budgets.
For starters, the border adjustment tax is laser-focused on importing businesses. This means that, even though there are other tax cuts in the plan, importers would face higher—and in many cases substantially higher—tax bills. These targeted companies would bear the large burden of paying for the rest of tax reform and at a price they can’t afford.Take a state like Texas. A recent analysis from our organizations found Texas importers could owe $30 billion in new taxes, even taking a partial currency adjustment into account—an outcome that supporters suggest will happen but that many economists have rejected.  That’s nearly the entire amount that all Texas businesses paid in all federal business taxes in 2014. The average Texas importer could owe an additional $1.3 million in import taxes alone.



Get The Latest Headline News 

at the top of this page for the latest headlines

Get The Latest From American Thinker
American Thinker
Click tab at top of page



John Nelson -
Bob Gilmore
Dick Fankhauser