The Scandal of the Secret Service’s Deleted Texts

Why the subterfuge? What might those texts reveal?

Julie Kelly reporting for American Greatness

Before and during Donald Trump’s time in the White House, powerful federal agencies aligned to sabotage his candidacy and then his presidency. Once-trusted entities such as the FBI, the intelligence community, and even parts of the U.S. military have burned their credibility by abandoning their missions to instead try to end Trump’s political career.

Does this include the Secret Service?

Unfortunately, the scandal over deleted texts related to January 6 demands the question. 

Last month, the inspector general for the Department of Homeland Security, the agency that houses the Secret Service, officially informed Congress that text messages the office sought as part of its investigation into the Capitol protest were gone. 

“The Department notified us that many U.S. Secret Service (USS) text messages, from January 5 and 6, 2021, were erased as part of a device-replacement program,” Dr. Joseph Cuffari wrote on July 13. “The USS erased those text messages after OIG requested records of electronic communications from the USS, as part of our evaluation of events at the Capitol on January 6,” an investigation Cuffari launched in February 2021.

Cuffari, a Trump appointee, addressed his letter to the Senate and House Homeland Security committees; the chair of the House Homeland Security committee is Representative Bennie Thomspon (D-Miss.) who also heads the January 6 select committee. On January 16, 2021, Congressional Democrats instructed DHS and other key federal agencies to retain all records involving the events of January 6.

Eleven days later, texts on cell phones used by multiple Secret Service officials and agents on duty on January 6 were erased.

A Secret Service spokesman indignantly downplayed the news. “The insinuation that the Secret Service maliciously deleted text messages following a request is false,” Anthony Guglielmi, communications director for the Secret Service, wrote in a statement on July 14. Mobile devices were reset to factory settings on January 27, 2021 as a result of a “system migration” in the works for three months, Guglielmi insisted. “DHS OIG requested electronic communications for the first time on Feb. 26, 2021, after the migration was well under way.” 

A few days later, he admitted the texts “probably were not recoverable.”

Despite Guglielmi’s spin, congressional leaders had already asked DHS officials to produce “all documents and materials that refer or relate to events that could or ultimately did transpire on January 6” before Cuffari opened his inquiry. The devices were evidence in a congressional investigation; failing to archive backups of phones belonging to any DHS employee even remotely tied to what happened on January 6 is highly suspect if not a federal offense.

And the purge did not happen while Trump or his Homeland Security chief were in charge. Between Congress’ first request for DHS to retain all records associated with January 6 and the cell phone “reset” on January 27, 2021, Joe Biden became president—which means the deletions happened on his watch. (David Pekoske, Biden’s current director of the Transportation Safety Administration and a Trump holdover, temporarily served as DHS chief from January 20 until February 2, 2021 when Alejandro Mayorkas was confirmed by the Senate.)

So Joe Biden’s DHS is thwarting the internal January 6 investigation—and Cuffari warned congressional Democrats at least twice of the department’s noncooperation. 

“During this reporting period, the Department significantly delayed OIG’s access to Department records, thereby impeding the progress of OIG’s review of the January 6 events at the Capitol,” Cuffari wrote in a semiannual report released in September 2021. “The Department repeatedly suggested that OIG might not have a right of access to the records sought, but during the months-long period in which access was delayed the Department did not cite any legal authority—that would have justified withholding the information.” A follow-up report published in March 2022 again warned that “access to Secret Service records [is] impeding the progress of our January 6, 2021 review.” 

Bennie Thompson presumably received both reports. Why didn’t he act?

Turns out the controversy reaches the highest levels of the Secret Service in Washington, D.C. To expand his investigation last summer, Cuffari specifically asked DHS for all text messages sent or received by 24 Secret Service officials between December 7, 2020 and January 8, 2021. These weren’t random low-level agents; the list includes James Murray, the director of the Secret Service who just delayed his new gig at Snapchat to remain in the position as the scandal escalates, and Robert Engel, head of Trump’s detail.

The trove presumably would contain thousands of messages and perhaps hundreds just from January 5 and 6. But in response to a subpoena by the January 6 select committee, the Secret Service revealed a bombshell: they could only find one text. The agency then informed the committee that it “did not have any further records responsive to DHS OIG’s request for text messages” but will research whether “such texts are recoverable.”

To recap: Joe Biden’s DHS allowed a purge of Secret Service cell phone data without mandating and archiving content, is stonewalling an internal investigation into what Joe Biden insists is a terrorist attack comparable to 9/11, and now shrugs off the fact that texts from 24 Secret Service employees including the head of agency over a crucial one-month period might be gone for good.

Given those revelations, one would assume the January 6 committee and House Democrats would be livid at DHS officials and calling for heads to roll. They are—but they want Cuffari’s head.

Just a few days after Cuffari announced a criminal probe into the missing texts, Thompson and Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Oversight Committee, asked for Cuffari’s resignation for failing “to inform Congress of this serious and flagrant violation of federal records laws.” In a follow-up letter on August 1, Thompson and Maloney accused Cuffari of “secretly abandon[ing] efforts” to collect the missing texts, an allegation that defies logic since Cuffari is the official who first publicly exposed the scandal.

Nevertheless, Thompson and Maloney asked Cuffari again to “step aside from this matter and for a new IG to be appointed in light of revelations that you had failed to keep Congress informed of your inability to obtain key information from the Secret Service.”

Biden reportedly is considering ousting Cuffari from his post; White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters last week that “we’re looking at the facts and the situation it is being investigated.”

Cuffari, for now, is standing his ground but it appears the Secret Service is attempting an end-around to further frustrate his investigation. The agency reportedly turned over the cell phone numbers of the 24 Secret Service agents in question to both the January 6 committee and the Justice Department in violation of a stand down order by Cuffari’s office not to interfere in its ongoing criminal inquiry.

Why the subterfuge? Would the texts finally explain why Kamala Harris, under Secret Service protection at the time, went to the Democratic National Committee headquarters the morning of January 6, the same place where a pipe bomb allegedly was found that afternoon? How did agents miss the explosive during a security sweep of the premises before she arrived? How did agents not locate the device for more than an hour while Harris remained in the building until law enforcement allegedly found it?

Would the public find out why the Secret Service made the decision to return Trump to the White House after his speech at the Ellipse against his wishes? Would testimony by former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, particularly claims that Trump attempted to carjack his own presidential vehicle and strangle Robert Engel that afternoon, be debunked?

Would the mystery of Vice President Mike Pence’s exact whereabouts be solved? As the chaos unfolded that afternoon, what exactly did the Secret Service do? And if the situation was so dangerous, why didn’t they evacuate Trump from the White House? Were agents involved in the evacuation of top congressional leaders, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, to Fort McNair around 3:00 p.m. on January 6?

Communications between Secret Service brass and agents in charge of protecting Trump, Harris, Pence, and Joe Biden that day almost certainly answer most if not all of those questions. And it’s the Biden regime and Democrats, not Trump or Joseph Cuffari, concealing the truth.

X22, And we Know, and more- August 9

 

It's easy to resort to dooming and glooming when you hear of some kind of maddening news, like thinking stuff like 'we're all doomed', 'The only answer is violence', and a lot of other things.

While that might be understandable in some scenarios, is it really that wise though? Do you really want to discredit all the good stuff that has happened throughout the year and still think that we're all doomed after hearing 1 distressing article? Ever think that maybe that's what the enemy wants, for us to completely doubt the future after hearing 1 distressing article?

Here's some very important advice for those struggling with hope in the face of whatever advirsity they hear about on the news:

There is ALWAYS a light at the end of the tunnel, no matter how dark the tunnel may seem. (How many times in the past 2 years has it looked like nothing was ever going to get better, and yet things still got better?)

A lot of good has happened throughout this year for a reason, and that's because things are changing for the better and not for the worst.

God is, and will always be in control. (and this isn't just something Christians believe in, it's the truth.).

Now, on to tonight's videos (might want to consider paying close attention to them tonight if you want some additional reasurrence.)

(1 bonus tibit: I loved 'Tangled The Series' when it aired, and it's very nice to see it's showrunner has good values: https://deadline.com/2022/08/daily-wire-ben-shapiro-disney-rapunzel-tangled-kids-division-hires-1235088127/ )

How Do We Get Rid of the FBI?

Short of abolishing the bureau, our elected leaders must exercise their power to reimpose constitutional supremacy over this out-of-control agency.

by Adam Mill for American Greatness

President Harry Truman saw the FBI as the seed of a totalitarian cancer it would later become. “We want no Gestapo or Secret Police,” Truman wrote. “F.B.I. is tending in that direction. They are dabbling in sex life scandles [sic] and plain blackmail when they should be catching criminals.” Whether it’s mass unconstitutional spying, interfering in American elections, lying to courts, or entrapping and sometimes framing innocent Americans, the debate over whether we should have an FBI is drawing to a close. Almost every month another informed author calls for the abolition of the FBI. 

So let’s move on to the next question: How do we get rid of the FBI? 

In theory, a properly motivated Congress could defund and shutter the FBI with a simple piece of legislation. Unfortunately, until Democrats and establishment Republicans swallow their fears and wake up to the threat the FBI poses to self-government, the FBI remains above the rule of law and beyond the reach democratic accountability. 

Still, there are incremental steps that could be taken to challenge the lawlessness of this untouchable agency. The winds of public opinion have begun to blow strongly against the FBI making the previously unthinkable possible. Republicans and Democrats should join together to take action, if they still can.

End the FBI’s Counterintelligence Work

There’s a reason why the FBI loves to paint its opponents and political rivals as, “agents of Putin,” or stooges for Russia. Through the Russian collusion hoax, the public learned that the FBI can use a false allegation of a target acting as a foreign agent to spy on political opponents. While the FBI, in theory, was supposed to have probable cause that Carter Page, a figure in the Trump campaign, was an agent of Russia, it lied to the FISA court to conceal Page’s history of providing information voluntarily to the CIA. Through the warrant to spy on Page, the FBI (in coordination with subcontractors for the Clinton campaign) spied on the Trump campaign. Long after the FBI knew there was “no there, there,” it used the sham counterintelligence investigation to engineer the appointment of a special counsel to interfere with the peaceful transition of power. 

The FBI has been ineffective at using the FISA court to catch real spies, however, preferring instead to reverse engineer warrants on real American targets who happen to have some incidental contact with a Russian. The FBI has shown it cannot be trusted with the domestic counterintelligence brief and that power should be reassigned to an agency that won’t abuse the power.

Combatting Elected Officials’ Fear of the FBI

Truman also wrote, “Hoover would give his right eye to take over, and all congressmen and senators are afraid of him.” Democrats are fools if they believe the FBI is a reliable ally. Truman would know. The FBI attempted to throw the 1948 presidential election by leaking to Republican challenger Thomas E. Dewey “compromising information about President Harry Truman’s former association with the Kansas City political machine of the corrupt boss Tom Pendergast. The details soon found their way into Republican campaign literature.” 

Politicians feared the FBI because of its ability to plant and spread stories with the imprimatur of the bureau as a source. When the FBI sees a candidate engaged in real corruption, however, it seems to do the opposite, running interference with the news media to protect that candidate by suppressing news stories or characterizing politically inconvenient evidence as “Russian disinformation.”

The problem is a thorny one because the FBI’s access to the vast national security databases (and its willingness to abuse them to spy on Americans) acts as a powerful psychological deterrent to politicians seeking to challenge the bureau.

One solution might be to demand of political candidates a pledge to publicly disclose any attempt by any member of the FBI to gain leverage over that politician. Further, the FBI should be required to register and report to the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General any contact with a political candidate, his family, an elected official, or a journalist. 

Increasing Transparency

Under the Freedom of Information Act, a request for information made to any government agency shall be processed within 20 business days, or approximately 30 calendar days. The FBI simply ignores this requirement, often insisting on a timeline of years. 

In one typical case, the FBI claimed it could not produce records of its surveillance of civil rights activists for 17 years. Both the Justice Department and its subordinate FBI have intentionally structured their FOIA systems to fail to keep up with public demand for records. This should be forbidden. Congress should force both agencies to provide the resources and staffing to meet the statutory deadline for documents. There’s little difference between the FBI being allowed to delay a request for 17 years and simply ignoring the law altogether.

The practice of slow-rolling FOIA requests lets the FBI and the Justice Department operate in near total secrecy, something that is anathema to democratic governance. If the FBI’s failure to follow FOIA time limits pertains to requested documents evidencing FBI misconduct, a requesting party should get attorney’s fees if it becomes necessary to sue to overcome stalling or obstruction.

Similarly, the FBI uses the excuse of a matter being under “active investigation” to block requests for materials that would potentially embarrass the bureau. Director Christopher Wray is particularly adept at claiming any topic that could shame his agency is “under investigation,” thus precluding him from discussing the matter. When the FBI wants to cover something up, say, the provenance of a laptop containing evidence of corrupt dealings of a favored politician, it simply keeps the investigation open for years and years, long past the point any serious investigation would have concluded.

Congress can and should define the limits of this “under investigation,” secrecy. Too often the FBI has held open an investigation into a matter of public interest while leaks aligning with the FBI’s interests continue to crop up in sympathetic media. After six months’ allowance of such secrecy, the FBI should be required to seek approval from the local U.S. attorney to certify the legitimacy of the continued secrecy. After a year, ongoing confidentiality should require approval from the attorney general himself. When the FBI does close a matter, it should notify the target in writing so he may combat the negative publicity the FBI generated in the first place.

And if it turns out that an FBI agent leaked details of the investigation to the press, the entire privilege should be waived for the remainder of the investigation. If the FBI can leak some of the details, the public should get all of the details.

End or Limit the Stings and Set-ups

The FBI must go to great lengths to justify its sprawling, worldwide empire. The bureau makes little or no dent in the crime that really plagues Americans. A typical FBI case more resembles the work of a fisherman who secretly places a store-bought fish on his hook before reeling it in to great public fanfare. 

After 9/11, the FBI scoured the Muslim community for mentally vulnerable targets who could be coaxed into participating in the FBI’s make-believe terror plots. More recently, a jury rejected the FBI’s contrived plot to “kidnap” Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer when it turned out that the FBI funded and set up the whole thing—even to the point of facilitating introductions among the “conspirators.” This is also why many in the public are alarmed that the FBI had informants inside the crowd that breached the Capitol on January 6. 

The FBI should not be allowed to justify its existence by making its own criminal plots. Congress should pass laws permitting expedited discovery in criminal cases and a procedure for quickly dismissing cases where the suspects were not already criminals when the FBI started its investigation. And while we’re at it, the Justice Department should not be able to hold defendantsin jail for a year without trial or bail to coerce plea deals.

Do Not Let the FBI and DOJ Investigate Their Own

The Justice Department Office of the Inspector General repeatedly has published reports detailing criminal misconduct by FBI and Justice Department personnel. When it refers these cases for prosecution, the vast majority of bad actors are not prosecuted, the case of former USA Gymnastics doctor, Larry Nassar, being one such example. This has led some to nickname the Justice Department, the Department of “Just Us.” Obviously, the Justice Department and the FBI do not apply the same rules to themselves that they expect the public to follow.

Congress should pass legislation requiring the appointment of a special counsel to investigate and prosecute FBI and Justice Department personnel credibly accused of criminal misconduct. Further, the inspector general should have the power to arrest and refer for prosecution any Justice Department or FBI employee caught abusing his power for personal gain or for partisan political advantage.

End Self-funding Through Forfeitures

Under the 1984 Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, the Justice Department uses money seized and forfeited from the public to help fund its operations. It can use additional portions of forfeited assets to kick back sweeteners to local law enforcement that helps the FBI. As I wrote here, this degrades Congress’ ability to oversee this powerful agency. Instead, all forfeited funds should be returned to the treasury under the Miscellaneous Receipts Act. If the Justice Department can’t use the money it takes from the public, often without criminally charging anyone, then the incentive to abuse the program will be reduced. 

The best course of action is for Congress to just scrap the FBI. But short of that, our elected leaders must exercise their power to re-impose constitutional supremacy over this out-of-control agency.

Pfizer Spends $5.4 Billion Cash to Purchase Company That Specializes in Treatment of Blood Disorders

Thinking about it, this certainly does appear to be a purchase based on self-interest.  The company that manufactured a product, potentially creating long-term issues with blood disorders (ie clotting), now purchases the company that specializes in the treatment of blood disorders.

Am I the only one that sees this as sketchy?

Aug 8 (Reuters) – Pfizer Inc on Monday agreed to pay $5.4 billion in cash for Global Blood Therapeutics (GBT.O), as it looks to capitalize on a surge in revenue from its COVID-19 vaccine and treatment.

Pfizer will pay $68.50 per GBT share, which represents a 7.3% premium to its Friday closing price. The deal is at a more than 40% premium where GBT was trading before the Wall Street Journal reported that Pfizer was in advanced talks to buy it on Thursday.

Pfizer’s 2021 revenue of $81.3 billion was nearly double the mark from the previous year, due to COVID-19 vaccine sales. With the addition of its COVID-19 antiviral pill Paxlovid, Pfizer is expected to generate around $100 billion in revenue this year, but sales from both products are expected to decline going forward.

Pfizer has been on the lookout for acquisitions that could bring in billions in annual sales by the end of the decade. (read more)

Aamir Malik, Pfizer’s top dealmaker, said the company was focused on improving growth for the second half of the decade. “We think that there are opportunities across all therapeutic areas that we’re active in,” Malik said.

Former AG Matthew Whitaker Rips Mar-a-Lago Raid: 'This Is Something From Banana Republics'

Bob Hoge reporting for RedState 

Former Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker appeared on Tucker Carlson Tonight Monday and excoriated the Justice Department for conducting today’s raid on the residence of a former president and current rival to the sitting POTUS. As we’ve been reporting, hundreds of FBI agents descended onto Donald Trump’s Florida residence, Mar-a-Lago, and left with many boxes of evidence. Whitaker told fill-in host Will Cain:

I just think this is an outrageous expansion of the FBI’s—really, I don’t know how else you say it—attack on Donald Trump for the last six years…

We’ve crossed the Rubicon to some extent. This is something from banana republics, not the United States of America.

Whitaker believes President Joe Biden would not have been consulted about the raid, but that Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Chris Wray both almost certainly would have had to sign off on the criminal investigation that led to it.

I would be surprised if this Department of Justice allowed Joe Biden to be involved. That would obviously be a line that shouldn’t be crossed in a criminal investigation. But yes, I would expect that Chris Wray and Merrick Garland both signed off on the criminal investigation of Donald Trump.

Whitaker served as Acting Attorney General from November 7, 2018, to February 14, 2019, after Jeff Sessions resigned. He also accused the Justice Department of politicizing the institution:

It’s hard not to believe that these [actions] are politically motivated. I have spent seven and a half years at the Department of Justice. It’s an institution that should be trusted, but they have eroded that trust to a point now, where I think, to your point earlier, they have a burden to demonstrate that this investigation is not completely politically motivated after Hillary Clinton walked scott-free for the last seven years.

What happens next? Whitaker thinks things are only going to get more problematic:

This is where the American people need to ask very difficult questions. Congress needs to ask very difficult questions. Because at the end of the day, if they’re really planning to bring Donald Trump to Washington, DC in front of a Washington, DC jury and a Washington, DC judge, you know, this republic is maybe not strong enough to bear that burden ultimately. But we will see.

The FBI is into an unprecedented area. The Department of Justice under the Democrats leadership I think is going into a very dangerous field right now.

Monday’s raid adds to the disturbing trend of the FBI to mount junta-style investigations and raids on Trump supporters and opponents of the Biden administration. They came after Roger Stone in 2019 like he was a dangerous terrorist, conducting a dawn operation with heavily-armed agents to bring him into custody for allegedly making false statements to Congress. Just last month the FBI repeated their antics, conducting yet another raid on a former Trump Justice Department official, Jeffrey Clark, who had to beg to be allowed to put on his pants. Add to the list the raid of Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe’s home in November 2021, and it becomes pretty clear that what we have here is a pattern.

This descent into banana republic politics is dangerous to our nation. Turning our Justice Department into a Democrat-armed force to intimidate political foes and their supporters is un-American. We can only hope Republicans do in fact dominate the midterms and put a stop to this nonsense.

Alan Dershowitz Rips FBI Raid on Trump, Raises Legal Questions About How It Was Conducted

Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

The reaction to the FBI raid — reportedly with a large group of agents — on Donald Trump’s home in Mar-a-Lago is setting off a firestorm of reactions.

Dan Bongino blasted it as some “third world bulls**t.” He also said it was a “clarion call” for everyone to get off their seats and vote the Democrats out. Dana Loesch believed it was the Democrats trying to settle “political scores.” Lara and Eric Trump ripped the action and provided more information about what had happened in the raid, including that the FBI didn’t find anything in a safe in the home when they cracked it open.

Reports are suggesting that this raid may be in relation to classified documents that they think should be with the National Archives. But if that’s the case, it’s an insane overreaction rather than just pursuing the documents in a normal manner. The family said they had been cooperating in reviewing documents that the National Archives might want. But to send in agents and just grab documents right and left, even breaking into the safe in the home is just wild and it sounds like a fishing expedition. Is it to try to find other things, with that as an excuse?

Constitutional scholar Alan Dershowitz is calling it “misconduct.” According to him, in an appearance on Newsmax, such a raid should be the method of last resort, unless they can’t get the documents through subpoenas or any other lawful methods.

“The raid is supposed to be a last resort,” he said. “But this administration has used the weaponization of the justice system against its political enemies. It has arrested people, denied them bail, put them in handcuffs – used all kinds of techniques that are not usually applied to American citizens. I just hope this raid has the justification. If it doesn’t have the justification, the materials seized in it will be suppressed.”

“This is improper, and this is misconduct,” Dershowitz said if they didn’t have any more justification. “We have to find out what the facts are. But we have to make sure the shoe fits on the other foot – that we want to make sure what is being one here is something that Democrats would not oppose if it were being done to Democratic operatives, as well.”

On Fox, Dershowitz took up another issue with the raid, saying that the government would have to show they had reasonable evidence that this information would be destroyed. Additionally, he said, they improperly opened the safe on the premises which they should not have done.

Dershowitz said that, in his opinion, they had “violated the rules of the Justice Department, they’d gone after a former president and a future candidate, and they darn well better have smoking gun proof, which I don’t see happening.”

“Clearly there’s been a double standard,” Dershowitz declared. “You don’t get a warrant unless a subpoena wouldn’t suffice.”

This has been a wild night, but the Biden Justice Department may have just stepped over the line and into a legal hornet’s nest with this action against Trump.

After Senate Passage, Democrats Drop Claim of Inflation Reduction Within Inflation Reduction Act

Sundance reporting for Conservative Treehouse 

Prior to the 51-50 passage of the massive $700+ billion democrat spending bill, they called it the “inflation reduction act.”  However, after Senate passage they are now calling it the climate change bill.  Funny how that happens.

The bill itself contains absolutely nothing that will lower inflation; in fact, the bill itself will raise supply-side inflation in direct proportion to the energy production it reduces. To offset the contracted revenue caused by a much smaller economy, the Democrats have doubled the IRS tax army that will enforce personal income tax compliance.

The income tax compliance portion of the bill is very significant on two fronts.  First, it literally doubles the size of the IRS, giving them much more power to conduct audits and capture taxes from income earned.  As a review of tax audits has shown, the ordinary U.S. taxpayer is the target of this increase enforcement mechanism, not corporate tax review.

WASHINGTON – […] The bill, a product of 18 months of intense wrangling, passed by a margin of 51 to 50 on Sunday with Vice-President Kamala Harris casting the deciding vote. It was previously blocked by two Democrat senators who shared Republican concerns about its cost.

The Senate bill includes $369bn for climate action, the second largest investment on Green New Deal spending in US history.  The largest bill on climate change was the previous Obama-era American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (AARA), that paid billions of dollars to solar groups (ex. now bankrupt Solyndra) and climate energy companies connected to Democrat donors.

In the current bill, high income households will receive up to $7,500 in tax credits to buy an electric car, or $4,000 for a used car.  Rich people will get discounts on their $100,000+ automobiles.  Billions more will be spent, yet again, on the production of “clean technology” such as solar panels and wind turbines.

Keeping the cultural war as a top priority, the Senate has also included $60 billion for ‘environmental justice‘ given to the leaders of black communities that have “suffered the most from fossil fuel pollution” according to the bill authors.  This mechanism helps Joe Biden pay back the black community, specifically BLM and the AME church network, who were instrumental in executing the ballot harvesting fraud that pushed Biden into office.

“After more than a year of hard work, the Senate is making history,” Schumer said shortly before final passage. “This bill will kickstart the era of affordable clean energy in America, it’s a game changer, it’s a turning point and it’s been a long time coming.” [link]

And just like that, the inflation reduction language is dropped.

The bill passed containing the same provisions as it always did, it’s the Green New Deal spending and tax proposal.

I dislike these people immensely.