by dap | Jan 16, 2025 | Daily Signal
Departing
offered a farewell brag this week to his State Department about how his tenure had improved America’s stature abroad. In his now accustomed weird mix of whispering and fiery shouting, Biden apparently felt he had to lie or mislead about almost every one of his “achievements.”
Yet to the extent that anything improved abroad on his watch—the weakening of Iran or the near destruction of Hamas and Hezbollah—it was due despite, not because of, Biden.
Biden, bowing to election year political pressure, did all he could to restrain and block Israeli retaliations to the Oct. 7 massacres. Only after he was repeatedly proven wrong does he now shamelessly take credit for what Israel ironically achieved by ignoring his own threats directed at Israel.
Biden is correct only that Iran is “weaker than it’s been in decades.” But Tehran was aided, not hurt, by Biden’s nonstop efforts to lift sanctions, to allow Iran to make billions in oil revenues, to pay the theocracy billions of dollars in hostage ransom, and to beg the mullahs to reenter the ill-starred Iran deal. Everything Biden did makes it
to survive.
So, Iran is now weakened only because Israel ignored Biden’s nonstop ankle-biting and finger-shaking not to retaliate to Iranian aggression. Instead, the Netanyahu government systematically destroyed Iranian air defenses after killing most of Iran’s foreign terrorist operatives.
Biden referenced the end of the Assad regime in Syria, but it imploded not due to any effort by Biden. It was overwhelmed instead only after the Israeli decimation of Hezbollah and humiliation of Iran—coupled with the election victory of
—that encouraged Assad’s enemies to attack a now isolated and weakened regime.
Biden is also taking credit for rumors that Hamas might release its hostages, who have been held in a subterranean labyrinth since Oct. 7.
But why, with less than a week left in his tenure, did Biden believe Hamas might begin releasing the hostages when even his own secretary of state,
, has criticized the administration for spending 16 months pressuring Israel, which only emboldened Hamas’ stonewalling?
Much more likely, the election of Trump and his threat to unleash terrible retribution on Hamas (and implicitly on Iran) had prompted the terrorists’ tardy willingness to negotiate a release.
Of the horrific scramble from Afghanistan—the greatest humiliation of the U.S. military in a half-century that cost the lives of 13 Marines—Biden boasted: “[I am] the first president in decades who’s not leaving a war in Afghanistan to his successor.”
Think of his warped logic: Biden does not leave a war to his successor only because he fled in humiliation and lost it.
Biden also took credit for saving Ukraine from Russia. But he conveniently omitted why Russia invaded in the first place.
Had Biden not destroyed American deterrence by fleeing Kabul and leaving behind billions of dollars in abandoned U.S. military equipment, had he not claimed, prior to the Russian invasion, that his reaction to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s likely aggression would hinge on whether it was “a minor incursion,” then the Russians might never have invaded at all.
Putin grabbed Crimea and the Donbas in 2014 during the Obama-Biden administration. He later sought to swallow the entire country with an attack on Kyiv in 2022 on Biden’s watch.
However, Putin stayed within his borders only during one of the last four administrations—Trump’s.
Biden crowed that he accomplished all these misadventures without the use of force—”We have not gone to war to make these things happen.”
But Biden did more than any other recent president to weaken
. Under his tenure, the Pentagon suffered a real reduction in its budget. And it never quite recovered from the Afghanistan debacle.
Annually, the military now comes up 40,000 recruits short due to Biden’s draconian vaccination requirements, its new woke mandates, and its constant false accusations of “white rage” and “white privilege” in the ranks—libels that prompted a Pentagon internal investigation that found no such racism.
China was never more bellicose than during Biden’s presidency. It serially threatened Taiwan, used cyber warfare to bully the U.S., brazenly expropriated U.S. military technology, and without worry sent a spy balloon to traverse the U.S. with impunity.
Biden’s open border saw more than 10 million illegal entries, among them thousands of Chinese nationals. Meanwhile, Chinese investors were freed to systematically buy up thousands of acres of America’s farmland adjacent to sensitive U.S. military bases and installations.
Add it all up, and Biden would have done better to have just kept quiet and departed his failed presidency in shame.
(C)2025 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.
The post
appeared first on
.
by dap | Jan 16, 2025 | Daily Signal
This is a lightly edited transcript of Tony Kinnett’s interview with Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas.
Tony Kinnett: Welcome back to the Tony Kinnett Cast here on The Daily Signal nationally syndicated first on 93 WYBC. It’s a pleasure to be joined again by
, this time, not on the phone dashing from one place to another. I know you’re really busy how those Senate confirmation hearings going.
Ted Cruz: Well, they’re moving well. We have had hearings now for half of
Cabinet, and we will see—I believe the entire Cabinet will be confirmed, every one of President Trump’s Cabinet nominees. I think it’s going to make it through the Senate. And I think we’ll have them all in place within the first 30 days. The first couple will be in place on Jan. 20, on Inauguration Day. And I think within 30 days, all of them will be in place.
Kinnett: Now, states like Texas, they have tough
races because the Texas voters, they pay attention to what you guys are saying.
Cruz: Yeah.
Kinnett: And then I look at the Senate
hearings and things like the Senator from Hawaii and her interesting statements. And I just wonder how close some voters must be paying attention. How do you have a bridge of your nose left? I would be pinching that just completely off out of exasperation.
Cruz: Well, listen, unfortunately, there are some of my
colleagues who embrace really radical policies. You know, if you want to ask yourself, how did things get so bad over the last four years? How did how did we embrace policies of wide-open borders to allow an invasion at our southern border with 12 million illegal immigrants coming into this country? How did the Democrat Party get to the point where they look the other way at Americans being murdered, at women being raped, at children being brutalized by violent, criminal, illegal aliens they were releasing every day into America? How did we get to such an extreme point that that that you have Democrats advocating boys playing in girls’ sports and sterilizing and mutilating little boys and little girls to try to alter their gender. Those are extreme positions. How did we get so bad that you’ve got Democrats undermining Israel and anti-Semitic protests erupting at colleges across the country, so much so that Jewish students don’t feel safe going to school? All of that is the fruit of the radicalization of the Democrat Party. And I think what is clear, what the voters made absolutely clear in November is their policies aren’t working. We’ve got a mandate for change. That’s why we’ve got a new president, a new administration, a Republican Senate, a Republican House. And now, Tony, we’ve got to deliver. We’ve got to roll up our sleeves, and we’ve got to deliver on our promises. That’s what my focus is every day.
Kinnett: That’s why I wanted to have you on again because it’s a lot of frustration for the average American seeing a House and a Senate that’s more concerned about peacocking, that’s more concerned about posturing and preening in front of all of us than getting to work. We have the Laken Riley Act on crime and immigration. Now we have the bill protecting women in and high school and college sports. We’re actually seeing a bit of progress from the Senate side though, at least from where you are in your position, what is getting work done look like for this Senate in the coming year?
Cruz: Listen, I’m very optimistic about the Senate. The voters have given us 53 Republicans that—I’m very glad it’s 53 and not, say, 51, which is barely a majority.
Kinnett: Right.
Cruz: Fifty-one, you’re worried about losing one or two votes and having everything go down. With 53, you’ve got a little bit of a margin for error. And so, the first thing on the plate is confirming the president’s Cabinet, because under the Constitution, the Senate has a responsibility to provide advice and consent. And that’s an important check-in balance between our branches. That is going to consume a lot of time the first couple of months. In terms of what we have to accomplish, the very first thing we have to accomplish is we must secure the border. That is the clearest and most overwhelming mandate from this election.
Kinnett: Hmmm.
Ted Cruz: It’s what we’re going to do. Donald Trump is going to come in on Jan. 20, and on Jan. 20, catch and release will end. We will no longer be apprehending illegal immigrants and just letting them go in every community in this country. And you are going to see President Trump arresting, detaining and deporting criminal, illegal aliens going and finding the murderers, the rapists, the gang members, and getting rid of them. That’s going to happen immediately. And Congress is going to follow up by appropriating significant funds in the neighborhood of $100 billion dollars to fund the wall, to build the wall, to hire more Border Patrol agents, to hire more ICE agents, to build more detention facilities and more detention beds, to provide materiel, like fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft and drones and infrared, so that we could accomplish this task. We’re going to do that.
Kinnett: Hold on just a second here.
Cruz: Beyond that, there’s a clear mandate to unleash American energy.
Kinnett: Ah.
Cruz: We’re going to do that as well, and we’re going to unleash jobs, lower prices, and bring the economy roaring back.
Kinnett: Excuse me, just a second Senator, you said $100 billion dollars in the neighborhood for border spending all of that for here, usually for that kind of money, we have to send it to Paraguay or something.
Cruz: Yeah. Yeah. But that’s all right here in the U.S. of A. Much of it will be on our southern border in Texas. Of our 2,000-mile southern border, 1,200 of those miles are right along in Texas. And we are going to secure not just Texas, but the entirety of our southern border and our northern border. Look, we are seeing terrorists coming in over the border from Canada. I met with a senior Canadian official just this week, and made very clear that the president is absolutely serious about using every lever tool we have with Canada and with Mexico to make sure those two nations are active participants in securing the border, because we’re not going to allow this invasion to continue even one day longer.
Kinnett: You know, it’s always good to hear senators talking to officials from other states, even if they’re future 51st states in this particular instance. You ended your conversation about the resources made for the border, talking a little bit about bringing back some jobs. I know obviously Americans are concerned with the whole nomination process because the central focus, at least as the public relations and media aspect of government, isn’t as focused at the second on the grocery prices, on the job market, on the economy. That doesn’t mean that it’s out of sight, out of mind necessarily, though. What do you see the Senate doing, at least in vague terms, if you can’t give us any specific details, on bringing the American economy back?
Cruz: Well, in terms of legislation, there’s quite a lot. I have this week introduced legislation, number one, to reverse Joe Biden’s ban on offshore drilling for much of the American coastline. That is something he’s done in these waning weeks. I’ve got to say, I’ve never seen an outgoing president do what Joe Biden is doing, demonstrate such contempt for the voters, such anger for the voters that decided to change the path we’re on. and every day Biden is issuing another policy that is basically a screw you to the voters. It is the opposite of what the voters said in November, and it’s an effort to hamstring President Trump and the incoming administration—well, I’ve introduced legislation to reverse that, because I think one of the clearest mandates of November …
Kinnett: Well said.
Cruz: … is unleash American energy. We are going to be energy dominant. We are going to lower energy prices. We’re going to lower prices of food and clothing and everything else. And so that’s legislation I introduced this week. Another piece of legislation I introduced this week is my bill to have no taxes on tips, to eliminate taxes on tips. That’s going to impact all sorts of people who are working and climbing the economic ladder, from waiters and waitresses to barbers and hairstylists to people working in nail salons to bartenders to taxicab drivers. And I got to say, my legislation is bipartisan. We’re going to get that done. And we are going to pass legislation, number one, as I said, funding securing the border, number two, unleashing American energy, number three, rebuilding the American military to defend this nation, and number four, extending the Trump tax cuts, which expire at the end of this year.
Kinnett: Absolutely.
Cruz: We’re going to make them bigger and bolder, and that is going to unleash small businesses and economic growth.
Kinnett: You’re like a hop skipping a point over where I want to go next. It’s just, oh there’s so much content, the last time that you were on I asked you if Heidi would let you have a throw pillow in the house that said drill baby drill and after hearing this actually if a listener to the show actually ended up cross stitching drill baby drill on to something, so, I got to tell you it’s gonna happen we’re gonna get the drill baby drill throw pillows out there and really unleash the energy independence and homes across the country.
Cruz: That’s awesome. And if you want to share the pillow, I can tell you I will happily put it in my office. I don’t have nearly the sway to be able to put it in the house. There are some things that Heidi would put her foot down on, and that’s clearly in the category.
Kinnett: That’s very fair. Moving to some of the conversation, obviously we saw with the future Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth in his confirmation hearing, a little less on the room of questions about America’s future, threats that America is facing than I would expect in a confirmation hearing about the secretary of defense. I was really disappointed that we spent so much time on frivolous, debunked theories rather than actually discussing America’s policy towards China, towards the Middle East, towards Western and Eastern Europe, instead asking Hegseth to get out his flashcards and name economic alliances. What do you think?
Cruz: Well, look, I think that’s exactly right. This is this is a topic I discussed in depth in one of my latest episodes of my podcast, “Verdict with Ted Cruz.” I do that three days a week, and we’ve analyzed this week each of the different confirmations, what’s happening, the issues that came up. If you look at Pete Hegseth, you know and Tony, I don’t know if you’re a poker player, but if you play poker, there’s something that’s called a tell. And a tell is when someone has either good cards or bad cards and something about the face, how their body language reveals what they have. That’s called a tell. Well, the Democrats have a tell. And they have a tell, which is when they don’t want to talk about the actual substantive job that someone has been appointed to do.
Kinnett: They put [Sen. Mazie] Hirono on the confirmation hearing.
Cruz: Yes, instead, what do they want to do? With Pete Hegseth, they wanted to go into the gutter. They wanted to engage in personal accusations, almost all of which have been made by anonymous accusers who won’t put their name to it, who have no evidence for what they’re saying, but the Democrats seemed eager to go into the gutter and just throw as much slime as they could.
Kinnett: Right.
Cruz: What you didn’t hear Democrats talking about is why Pete Hegseth was nominated. He is a decorated combat veteran. He was deployed abroad, leading soldiers, fighting the bad guys, protecting America. He’s devoted his entire life to advocating and fighting for our veterans and for our active-duty military. And I believe Pete Hegseth, number one, he will be confirmed. But, number two, his principal objective is to get the Department of Defense back to its core mission. And that core mission is supporting the warfighter and being prepared to defeat and, if necessary, kill the enemy. That’s the job of the Department of Defense. And we’ve seen, under Joe Biden and Barack Obama before him, the Defense Department run down all of these politically correct woke ideologies and focus on every other damn thing on Earth, other than supporting the warfighter and being prepared to defeat the enemy. And here’s a prediction I’m going to make for you. When Pete Hegseth is confirmed as secretary of defense, we are going to see enlistment numbers rise dramatically. There’s right now a crisis where under Joe Biden, young men and women are not signing up to serve in the military. That’s going to change, because I think if you ask a young man or woman or a young patriot, hey, do you wouldn’t want to be part of this left-wing social justice crusade?
Kinnett: Right.
Cruz: A whole bunch of people say, no, thanks. I’m going to do something else with my life. If you ask them, do you want to defend America? Do you want to be a hero and keep this great country safe? There are a lot of men and women who step forward and say, ‘Yes, sir, that is my duty.’ That’s what I want to do.
Kinnett: Well said. I’m looking at the live transcript here and I didn’t see you mention anything about pronouns or admirals in dresses. So that, hey, if what a plus, Sen. Ted Cruz from Texas.
Cruz: Ah.
Kinnett: Thank you so much for joining us a little bit and good luck at the rest of the confirmation hearings.
Cruz: Take care.
Kinnett: We‘ll be back in just a second. Don‘t go anywhere. It‘s the Tony Kinnett here on The Daily Signal.
The post
appeared first on
.
by dap | Jan 16, 2025 | Daily Signal
Members of Congress get a number of generous benefits from their positions. They earn $174,000 annually (nearly three times the salary of the
), they are provided with a sizable per diem for lodging and meals during their travels across the nation and abroad, they have the best health insurance that money can buy, and many will eventually benefit from a solid pension–among other benefits. However, an additional benefit has garnered the interest of and angered many Americans in recent years. It seems to be the case that many members of Congress trade stocks based on non-public information without repercussions.
A recent report by Unusual Whales, a platform
found that at least 20 members of Congress had returns greater than Standard and Poor’s 500, at least five had returns of over 100%, an additional two members earned a return of more than 95%, and an additional four earned a return of over 70%.
Contrary to popular belief,
trading stocks based on insider information is, in fact, illegal. Following a 2011 “60 Minutes” segment that accused members of Congress of using insider information for stock market gains, former President Barack Obama signed into law the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act of 2012, which established disclosure obligations for Congress members regarding stock trades conducted within 30 to 45 days of each transaction. And to leave no doubt about its intentions, it explicitly stated that members of Congress are not exempt from insider trading laws.
Has that prevented members of Congress from trading on nonpublic information? The evidence appears to indicate that they continue to do so. In February 2020, former Sen. Richard Burr, then chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, divested stocks valued between $628,000 and $1.7 million merely one month prior to the market collapse
Former Sen. Kelly Loeffler, after a confidential Senate briefing on COVID-19 in January 2020, divested her and her husband’s stocks valued between $1.275 million and $3.1 million prior to the pandemic. In 2020, Rep. Mike Kelly’s spouse acquired shares in Cleveland-Cliffs Inc., a steel manufacturer, just prior to the Commerce Department’s announcement of a proposed rule that could have benefited the company. Many instances exist of Congress members engaging in timely trades involving companies that would either benefit or suffer from legislation under their committees, or who may have disclosed nonpublic information to members of those committees.
Obama didn’t go far enough when he signed the STOCK Act. Congress members should be unequivocally prohibited from
. Justifying this is not particularly challenging when one considers that Congress members, the ones who pass our laws, should never give an appearance of impropriety in the work that they do. When a member of Congress engages in stock trading, it raises the question of whether the transaction was influenced by information they acquired, even if it was a completely legitimate trade. It also makes people question whether they acted the way that they did in the interest of their constituents and not their stock portfolio.
Public servants must not exploit the information they gained on the job for personal financial gain. It undermines their motivations and diminishes overall trust in our legislature. If there is no financial incentive to act a certain way on an issue, such as stock trading, the public would have greater confidence that public servants advocate for legislation for the benefit of their constituents rather than for personal financial gain.
While some members of Congress benefit from insider trading, their constituents, on average, endure the consequences of escalating costs for essential household items.
The actions of these members of Congress are criminal. Literally. While they engage in insider trading and evade penalties, the average American who does the same would face imprisonment for up to 20 years. Members of Congress engage in this conduct so brazenly, as they believe themselves to be above the law.
And they’re not wrong. They are above the law in that the most critical evidence required for prosecutors to obtain a conviction against a Congress member would be entirely unavailable to them due to the speech and debate clause of the Constitution. By way of example, in a 2015 case, the speech and debate clause forced the Securities and Exchange Commission to drop substantial portions of its subpoena aimed at a staff member who disclosed nonpublic information to a lobbyist.
Americans are suffering while Congress members are getting rich. How can we trust our legislators to prioritize the interests of the American people when they are profoundly incentivized to act otherwise? Congress needs a fix. The incentives of money need to be taken away, and it needs to happen sooner rather than later.
COPYRIGHT 2025 CREATORS.COM
We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.
The post
appeared first on
.
by dap | Jan 16, 2025 | Daily Signal
Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of the accompanying video from noted historian and
senior contributor Victor Davis Hanson.
Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal.
We’re witnessing the confirmation hearings in the U.S. Senate of
nominations. Many of them will not gain a lot of attention. Some did.
The two most interesting, controversial, famous, infamous—were Pam Bondi as attorney general and Pete Hegseth as defense secretary. But before we get into them, very quickly, remember what Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said to the Democrat minority: This will be an occasion that we make the argument against the MAGA
, and we can do it by these basically two unqualified nominees.
So, Pete Hegseth went in. He was calm. He was relaxed. And apparently, his rope-a-dope strategy was unknown or unexpected by Sen. Elizabeth Warren, [D-Mass.], [Democrat] Sen. [Mazie] Hirono from Hawaii, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse [D-R.I.], Sen. Adam Schiff [D-Calif.] I could go on and on, but their tactic was to scream and yell at him and focus on his private life.
So, you had this Orwellian situation where senators who had been very friendly with Kamala Harris’ husband, who impregnated his nanny, and Bill Clinton, who conducted oral intercourse—I’ll be blunt—right out of the White House’s Oval Office. These same senators were then damning Pete Hegseth for an extramarital affair that he shouldn’t have engaged in but which he’s apologized for, and he’s asked for forgiveness. And of course, compared to the average Senate life, unfortunately, it’s not unknown in Washington.
But then when they started to ask him questions about defense, he answered every question spectacularly, and they got very, very angry. And it was all emblematic, at one moment, when Elizabeth Warren—who’s clever by half—she kept hammering and yelling and interrupting.
Excuse me, I’m not a sexist, but it sounded so shrill.
And at one point, she said, “Well, you vote that generals should not be in the revolving door.” And he has, and I think people are righteously skeptical of a general who comes from Raytheon like Lloyd Austin and, no doubt, will go back to Raytheon. And so, she said, “And now you’re a hypocrite because you won’t condemn it.”
And he said, “I’m not a general, senator.” End of story. So, he, in one word, kind of demolished her.
Apparently, their perception was: These people are unqualified; they’re not sober, judicious, and skilled, and intelligent like we are. But they have no idea who they [the nominees] were. Anybody who followed Pam Bondi and Pete Hegseth know they were experts in television. They look good on TV. They go on Fox News, nightly, daily. Their whole forte is extemporaneous repartee—ask me any question, I’m on air in front of 4 million people, I can do it—that’s what they do.
So, they came in here as the experts, and the rookies were the people interrogating them. And the more and more inept they seemed, the angrier and angrier—and they doubled down. It was a disaster for them, and it made
an automatic confirmation.
Very quickly, Pam Bondi came in. They thought that she had been Trump’s lawyer; [they thought] she was a lightweight, she was a MAGA person. They started asking her questions. And then something very eerie happened. They started projecting what Merrick Garland and [Joe] Biden had done: “So, are you going to weaponize the DOJ [Department of Justice]? Are you going to think of the crime first, and then find the victim?”
And, as cool as a cucumber, she said, “Well, that’s what you do. So, I’m not going to target Donald Trump and then make up crimes to embarrass him or nullify his candidacy—crimes which we would never have indicted anybody for had they either been not Donald Trump or had Donald Trump chosen not to run again.”
Final thing, while this was going on and the American people saw these people hit their head against the wall and ensure the confirmation of Bondi
—and by association, probably Kash Patel and others to come, like RFK Jr.,—we had the Los Angeles fires. And it was, unfortunately, a catastrophic exposure of the whole bankruptcy of the radical Left.
From the timber not being harvested, from the hillsides not being cleaned, from the dams not being built, from the dams being blown up, to the fire chief, the fire chief’s assistant, the mayor, the deputy. I could go on and on, but it was a case study of why you do not want those people in charge.
And then finally, we had the exit of Joe Biden, pardoning 1,500 people, pardoning people from the death penalty who were gruesome killers, pardoning his son when he had promised not to. So, put all that together, and then the protectors and defenders of all of [those terrible things] were going after two skilled nominations of people who’d spent their whole life either in the military, as in the case of Pete Hegseth, or in the courtroom, like Pam Bondi. [They] were not just familiar, but perfectly at home under the lights.
It was a bad day for the Democrats, and it will help all of Trump’s nominations to be confirmed quickly.
Thank you very much. This is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal.
The post
appeared first on
.
by dap | Jan 16, 2025 | Daily Signal
Scott Turner, nominated to be secretary of Housing and Urban Development, on Thursday likened his proposed approach to leading the federal agency to his days as a cornerback playing for the NFL’s then-Washington Redskins.
“When I played in the NFL, we relied on game films to identify our mistakes and areas for improvement. I spent hours poring over the tapes to identify the smallest weaknesses in my game and determine what I could do to improve,” Turner told members of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee at his confirmation hearing.
Improving the department by making it more efficient and maximizing the efficient use of its resources was a refrain Turner returned to throughout the hearing.
The panel’s chairman, Sen.
, R-S.C., opened the proceedings by noting that housing “isn’t just about shelter.”
“Housing is about opportunity, and it is about stability. Housing creates the foundation for achieving the American dream.” But he noted that the data is clear: “The American dream of homeownership is slipping further and further away.”
The South Carolina senator noted that Turner had been the executive director of the White House Opportunity and Revitalization Council during President Donald Trump’s first term. In that position, Turner assisted with the
, which Scott had authored. The program, enacted through Trump’s tax cuts legislation, directed private investment into devastated communities with federal tax incentives.
In his opening statement at the hearing, Turner discussed how he had worked as a dishwasher while in high school, and he noted his background as a
. He emphasized that the challenges HUD seeks to address were personal for him.
“They’re not just things I hear about and read about. These are experiences that members of my family and I have seen and lived. And that perspective is something I can bring to the table,” Turner declared to the committee, clearly moved by his testimony.
A topic of much discussion during the hearing was the housing crisis in the United States. The nominee highlighted how owning a home was key to building intergenerational wealth. When Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., asked Turner why he thought housing costs were so high, he cited a lack of supply of homes. “We need about 7 million new housing units in America,” he said.
Turner committed to making the most of HUD’s budget.
In one of the most moving parts of the hearing, Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., recalled growing up in a trailer park. He said that being the head of a federal department requires intercepting bad ideas.
“One bad idea is just throwing money after something without trying to figure out how to fix the plumbing in HUD,” Tillis said. He asked if he could get Turner’s commitment to do an audit of HUD, which Turner agreed to.
Freshman Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, noted that as many as
have entered the country since President Joe Biden took office in January 2021 and asked how illegal migration affected the housing crisis. Turner referenced a HUD report that
had
to housing supply-and-demand issues. “It’s a huge burden,” he said.
Turner said localities are best equipped to address the housing problems they face. Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., mused about a potential congressional plan to incentivize localities and state governments to build more housing. Turner responded by noting that “incentives do a lot” and that “competition always brings out the best.”
Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., asked about how
might affect housing construction. Turner demurred from criticizing the tariffs placed on softwood by either the Trump or Biden administrations, pointing out that imposing or not imposing tariffs was the responsibility of the president and Congress.
Sen. Jim Banks, R-Ind., asked
at HUD. “Do you think HUD should be holding grant applicants hostage to a [diversity, equity and inclusion] agenda?” he asked. Turner replied that the government shouldn’t hold grant applicants “hostage to anything.” He agreed to looking into those Biden administration HUD regulations.
Another member of the committee, Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., told The Daily Signal in a statement that “Scott Turner is a strong pick for secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and I look forward to working with him. His experience working in the housing space is exactly what America needs right now. Our country is facing a serious affordable housing crisis. Inflation, high costs, and low inventory have put homeownership even further out of reach.
“Exacerbating that crisis is the fact that 24% of the cost of building a new home is from government regulation. Whether it’s buying a home or succeeding in business, it is critical we ensure families across our nation can achieve their own personal American dream. Scott Turner is ready to be a part of that, and he will do a phenomenal job of instituting President Trump’s agenda,” Britt said.
Turner’s hearing was much less contentious than those this week of some
selected to
. Some senators welcomed the nominee with a discussion of football, given his previous career.
The post
appeared first on
.
by dap | Jan 16, 2025 | Daily Signal
House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman
is set to meet Friday with President-elect
nominees to run the Justice Department and the FBI.
In Comer’s meetings with
and
—Trump’s picks to be the next attorney general and FBI director, respectively—they will discuss topics including potential corruption by outgoing President Joe Biden’s family as well as federal bureaucrats, Comer told The Daily Signal.
The
Republican noted that the president’s pardon of his son Hunter extended back to 2014, as far back as the bank records of financial transactions that the House subpoenaed.
“We want to see the
hold these people accountable for crimes that have been committed. A lot of the crimes that Hunter committed happened prior to 2014,” Comer said in a wide-ranging interview to be aired in full on “The Daily Signal Podcast.”
“The pardon Joe issued to
started in 2014 and went to today, I guess the rest of his life. The reason he went back to 2014 [was] that’s when we started subpoenaing bank records. That was about as far back as I could go with the banks.”
Comer’s new book, “
,” was released this week.
Comer further noted that the president’s brother, Jim Biden, was also involved in unusual business activity.
Hunter Biden was convicted on a gun crime and pleaded guilty on tax charges last year. He was pardoned by his father last month. Jim Biden has not been charged with a crime.
The president has said the investigations in Congress and by special counsel David Weiss were politically motivated. In his final report on the investigation of Hunter Biden, which became public this week, Weiss—who initially offered what critics called a “sweetheart deal” to the president’s son—
with the president’s characterization.
Hunter Biden’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, has said the investigations were meritless and criticized the Justice Department for bringing the cases.
Comer noted that when questioning the Biden family’s financial activity, “the deep state would step in and say, ‘No, stand down.’”
“That’s what I want to talk to Kash Patel about,” the Kentucky Republican said.
“Look, I’m not telling you what to do, but you need to hold these people accountable or you’re never going to reform these intelligence communities, if you don’t set some examples out of some people, some deep state, unelected bureaucrats that have abused their power,” Comer said, suggesting what he would say to Patel.
The oversight chairman said he already sees a major improvement. He suspected that outgoing FBI Director Christopher Wray would leak inaccurate information about the
investigations to the media.
“I’ve gone for two years having to watch my back with Christopher Wray,” Comer said. “So, to go from a guy that was dishonest to me, that obstructed all my investigations … to Kash Patel, a guy who called me wanting to meet, to talk, to get advice, and strategize about cleaning that agency up, it’s a pretty good day for me. And Pam Bondi, I will be communicating with her on holding people accountable.
“Jan. 20th can’t get here fast enough for me,” Comer said.
The post
appeared first on
.
by dap | Jan 16, 2025 | Daily Signal
With the GOP’s
in the House of Representatives, the House Freedom Caucus’ conservative members could have a veto over the upcoming budget reconciliation package that aims to pass massive portions of President-elect Donald Trump’s agenda. The Freedom Caucus made its budget reconciliation priorities known Thursday, releasing a proposal that seeks to make the MAGA agenda happen while fitting it within the budget.
In their two-page plan, members of the Freedom Caucus propose cutting Biden administration spending and raising the debt ceiling to make room for Trump campaign promises such as the border wall.
“We would quickly fund border security, modernize the U.S. military, cut spending by reversing some of the worst Biden policies, right-size federal agencies and programs, and increase the debt ceiling for two years, while legitimately bending the spending curve down for the first time in two decades,” reads a statement from the Freedom Caucus.
R-Md., chairman of the Freedom Caucus, told The Daily Signal that his colleagues had to be realistic in terms of how much they could balance the budget.
“The budget is not going to be in balance for 10 years or so,” said Harris. “What we have to do is, we have to bend the deficit curve.”
In Harris’ view, it is necessary to raise the debt ceiling to implement Trump’s agenda and to keep financial markets stable.
“We need to deliver on the border quickly. We think we need to reassure the financial markets that we’re serious about cutting spending, and we think we need to reassure the financial markets that we are, in fact, going to have a debt ceiling increase,” said Harris.
Rep. Russ Fulcher, R-Idaho, a member of the Freedom Caucus, told The Daily Signal that the reconciliation proposal largely came out of a compromise at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home between Trump and Republican congressmen who had concerns about excessive spending.
“I, as well as most of the other people that contributed to this proposal, met with the president last Friday at his request, and we made notes and we provided input—things that were important to us. He pointed out things that were important to him. And that was the genesis of this letter,” said Fulcher.
“The president, for fiscal reasons, really wants to see a
—not for the reasons, per se, of just opening up the ability to spend more, but just to provide some breathing room for Wall Street and bond markets,” he said.
The reconciliation plan mentions Elon Musk’s
or DOGE, a proposed commission to advise Trump on cutting wasteful government programs.
The letter says the plan will “empower DOGE” and “sets the stage for DOGE cuts in FY26 [fiscal year 2026] appropriations.”
Fulcher said that Musk played a large role in the negotiation of the plan, pushing for an increased role for the Department of Government Efficiency.
“Mr. Musk was part of our meetings the entire time that we met with the president,” said Fulcher. “So, we got a little bit of a feel for his approach, and I think where the president is trying to go there is just outside interest—kind of a refreshing, nongovernment look at the overall spending paradigm.”
Harris told The Daily Signal that he doesn’t know exactly how DOGE will function, but that the president-elect and Congress are taking it seriously.
“Obviously, that’s for the administration to figure out exactly how it’s structured and what it does,” said Harris. “But we think that the administration and Congress should seriously look at their work and take their proposals into consideration. Some of them can be delivered by executive action, some are going to take Congress … But we think the recommendations by Elon and
[Ramaswamy] have to be taken very seriously.”
With Thursday’s budget proposal, the Freedom Caucus is attempting to unite a tiny Republican House majority that can afford almost no dissent against Trump’s agenda.
“We’ve actually designed a plan which, combined with the debt ceiling increase, could actually be passed by Republicans alone,” Harris said. “That’s why we call it the 218 plan. There’s no need to involve Chuck Schumer, as you would involve if you do it in any other way other than reconciliation.”
The big question, however, is what will House Freedom Caucus members do if Speaker Mike Johnson’s, R-La., plan is different from theirs.
The post
appeared first on
.
by dap | Jan 16, 2025 | Daily Signal
At his confirmation hearing Thursday,
-designate Lee Zeldin suggested he would rein in a weaponized—literally weaponized—bureaucracy at the EPA.
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee held the hearing for Zeldin, President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to be the EPA administrator.
During the hearing, Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, relayed instances during the administrations of Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden of armed EPA officials conducting raids of local miners and
in Alaska, only to find no violations of the Clean Water Act they were looking for.
“I believe in the Second Amendment. I don’t believe in an armed bureaucracy. The EPA is a SWAT team,” the Alaska lawmaker said.
“Do you believe the EPA should even have armed agents?” Sullivan asked, adding: “Can I get your commitment to focus on compliance, civil compliance, as opposed to kicking in doors, assault rifles, helicopters? It’s crazy. It’s really outrageous, and it happens under Democrats.”
Zeldin, a former U.S. House member who ran for New York governor in 2022, responded, “Senator, it is outrageous.”
“It led me, as someone who is going through this transition, to be asking questions: How did that even get authorized? Who signed off on that? What are the standards that need to be met in order to even say ‘yes’ to an operation like that?” Zeldin said.
Sullivan noted that one of the auto mechanic shops was owned by eight men who were state National Guard members and “great Alaskans.” He asked again whether EPA officials should even have firearms.
“Senator, if something requires an enforcement action on a prosecutorial front that is working with the Department of Justice, Congress has enacted laws where enforcement is part of the effort on the compliance front, there are people and entities owning property where there is mitigation that needs to happen, where they want to work with the government to mitigate that situation on their property, we should be working with them to make that happen,” Zeldin said.
In sharing details of the events in Alaska, Sullivan said such matters didn’t happen during the Trump administration.
“The Obama administration, what they do is, they come in with giant, heavily armed agents, body armor, helicopters. It’s shocking,” the Alaskan said. “We had a raid on some plaster miners in a place called Chicken, Alaska, under President Obama. Over 30 armed agents, body armor, to do what? To do with compliance with the Clean Water Act. They didn’t find one violation. They scared the hell out of the miners.”
That was restarted under Biden, Sullivan said.
“Not to be outdone, the Biden administration has done these raids on small mechanic shops in Alaska. They bring up EPA agents from all over the country—armed agents, kicking in doors in mechanic shops in Alaska,” he said.
During the hearing, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who caucuses with Democrats, suggested the need for the EPA to cooperate with China.
“I know it’s fashionable to be beating up on China. It’s good politics. They are now the major carbon polluter in the world. We have historically had that role. We are now No. 2. We’re not going to solve this crisis without working with China. Are you prepared to work with China to lower carbon emissions?” They are now the major carbon polluter in the world. We have historically had that role. We are now No. 2. We’re not going to solve this crisis without working with China. Are you prepared to work with China to lower carbon emissions?”
Zeldin responded that China is an adversary.
“Senator, on many different issues, it is important not to just be working with nations that we are the strongest aligned with, but to also be in communication and engaged in dialogue with countries that might be competitors and also our greatest adversaries. Right now, China is an adversary in many respects,” Zeldin said.
The post
appeared first on
.
by dap | Jan 16, 2025 | Daily Signal
A&M University is in legal and political trouble.
It faces threats of civil rights liability, the loss of federal funding, and the
, all because its general counsel,
, gave the university legal advice that he should have known was unsound.
Journalist-activist Chris Rufo revealed on
that Texas A&M University is
on March 20 and 21 in Chicago. The conference lists Texas A&M among its “
” and excludes Asian and white people from attending.
Internal emails from the university reveal that Dean
solicited attendees from among the university’s faculty and Ph.D. students to represent Texas A&M at the conference.
Those emails also reveal that Withers sought the advice of Bonilla, and that Bonilla approved the university’s participation in this racially discriminatory program—even though federal and state law forbid it.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 says that “no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.”
Texas A&M receives hundreds of millions of federal dollars, and the DEI conference excludes anyone who is white or
.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act makes it illegal to discriminate based on race with respect to any “privileges of employment.” According to the internal emails that Rufo obtained, Dean Withers said that the university sends several of its faculty and advanced Ph.D. students to this conference in their official capacities as “representatives” of the school.
Texas has civil rights laws that mirror the federal ones, and it has another law,
, that forbids Texas universities from engaging in DEI activities that, among other things, give racial preferences to any “participant in any function of the institution.”
It’s unclear from the emails that Rufo published why Bonilla advised Texas A&M that it could support and sponsor travel to this racially discriminatory
conference. But given that the law is clear, two conclusions suggest themselves: Either Bonilla made an enormous mistake of legal judgment or his judgment was clouded by ideology.
It’s no secret that many administrators at America’s colleges are opposed to race neutrality. Harvard
, where it tried to defend admissions policies that discriminated against Asian and white students. Other universities are
to preserve racial preferences. Still other universities spend
creating racially segregated dorms, graduation ceremonies, and programs about “white supremacy culture.”
Many universities,
, have embraced “
,” which calls race neutrality “white supremacy” and whose
“the only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.”
Bonilla seems to be one of those administrators. Before he served as the university’s general counsel, he was a staffer for a Democratic senator, and according to the political donation-tracking website
, Bonilla and his former law firm, Ray, Wood & Bonilla, donated tens of thousands of dollars to Democratic candidates, campaign committees, and PACs.
Of course, Bonilla is within his rights to donate to partisans. As general counsel to a public university that takes billions of taxpayer dollars, however, he has a legal duty not to let his political opinions cloud his legal judgment. He might not like state and federal civil rights laws that mandate race neutrality and nondiscrimination, but he cannot tell his client that it can violate those laws.
Texas A&M is now in serious legal jeopardy. President-elect Donald Trump made opposition to racially discriminatory DEI programs a central part of his platform. So has Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who has
.
Bonilla has put a target on his school’s back. The school could be sued, could lose federal funding, and Welsh could lose his job. Bonilla himself may be at risk with the state bar for advising a state university that it could violate state law.
But the risk to Texas A&M students is the greatest. The loss of funding would devastate the school, but the law is what it is.
The consequences of violating civil rights law are dire because race discrimination is dire. That’s why it’s so important for general counsels to carefully advise their clients to obey the law.
Bonilla’s error, whether motivated my partisanship and ideology or simply poor legal judgment, is enormous, and every university general counsel should be careful not to repeat it.
The post
appeared first on
.
by dap | Jan 16, 2025 | Daily Signal
This week, President-elect
began their Senate confirmation hearings. After four years of the administrative malaise of the Biden administration, the nominees proved to be a breath of fresh air. They completely reject the failed philosophies of the Biden years—and the contrast is absolutely stunning.
Secretary of Defense nominee Pete Hegseth explained that it was time to “bring the warrior culture back to the Department of Defense.” His laser focus would be on “warfighting, lethality, meritocracy, standards, and readiness.” To do that, Hegseth pledged to eviscerate so-called
standards, explaining, “The strength of our military is our unity—our shared purpose—not our differences.”
For that absolutely anodyne perspective, Democrats raked Hegseth over the coals. Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., angrily intoned, “
is more diverse than it has ever been, but more importantly, it is more lethal than it has ever been. This is not a coincidence.” Of course, diversity has literally nothing to do with lethality; the notion that an army formed from members of different ethnicities but without common purpose would somehow overcome an army with unified purpose but without racial diversity is absolutely asinine. But such nostrums have governed our military policy for decades. That’s how we end up with the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley disclaiming on the evils of “white rage.”
Reed went on to criticize Hegseth for his negative appraisal of the restrictive rules of engagement often promulgated by the Defense Department. “As someone who’s led men in combat directly and had to make very difficult decisions, I thought very deeply about the balance between legality and lethality, ensuring that the men and women on the front lines have the opportunity to destroy with and close the enemy and that lawyers aren’t the ones getting in the way,” Hegseth replied. Hegseth understands that all too often, the
are turned against the humane parties to any conflict while those who abuse those rules are treated to their benefits.
Meanwhile, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., was having a meltdown of her own. Enraged at past Hegseth comments suggesting his opposition to
in frontline positions, she ranted, “You said in your statement you don’t want politics in the DOD. Everything you’ve said in these public statements is politics. ‘I don’t want women, I don’t want moms.’ What’s wrong with a mom, by the way? Once you have babies, you therefore are no longer able to be lethal?” Of course, as Hegseth made clear, what he was saying was that any factor that stands in the way of military efficacy ought to be put aside. But for the Left, the purpose of the military is to promote social policy rather than to win wars.
Hegseth will be approved this week. And he should be. For too long, the American military has been run
focused on winning the internal political warfare within Defense rather than winning actual wars. For too long, members of the American military have served at the whim of those who are willing to risk their blood to preserve utopian fantasies about the antiseptic possibilities of warfighting.
That era is over.
If only it had ended long ago.
COPYRIGHT 2025 CREATORS.COM
Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.
The post
appeared first on
.
