Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley walked back comments she made last week when she suggested that the state of Texas could secede from the U.S. if it wanted to.
During an interview with The Breakfast Club on Wednesday, Haley <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/nikki-haley-texas-secede-us-isnt/story?id=106837677">said</a> that &#8220;if Texas decides they want to do that, they can do that.&#8221;
&#8220;If that whole state says, &#8216;We don&#8217;t want to be part of America anymore,&#8217; I mean, that&#8217;s their decision to make,&#8221; she continued, later adding: &#8220;Let&#8217;s talk about what&#8217;s reality. Texas isn&#8217;t going to secede.&#8221;
During a Sunday interview with Dana Bash on CNN&#8217;s &#8220;State of the Union,&#8221; Haley walked back those comments when asked if she really believed that &#8220;individual states have the right to leave the USA.&#8221;
&#8220;No one is talking about seceding. That&#8217;s not an issue at all,&#8221; she responded. &#8220;What we are talking about the fact is, here you have Governor Abbott and the people of Texas, who just want to be kept safe. They&#8217;re putting up barbed wire to keep people coming in. And the idea that the federal government is wanting to sue them and cut that barbed wire, when we&#8217;re trying to make sure that we keep people out, that&#8217;s a huge mistake.&#8221;
Bash again pressed Haley on the issue after she did not answer the question: &#8220;You want to be president of the United States. Do you think that any state has a right to secede?&#8221;
&#8220;No. According to the Constitution, they can&#8217;t,&#8221; Haley responded. &#8220;What I do think they have the right to do is have the power to protect themselves and do all that. Texas has talked about seceding for a long time. The Constitution doesn&#8217;t allow for that. But what I will say is, where&#8217;s that coming from? That&#8217;s coming from the fact that people don&#8217;t think that government is listening to them.&#8221;
WATCH:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Why Haley says Trump is &#039;absolutely&#039; playing politics at the border" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-2FHDYZrdzc?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Republican Presidential Candidate Nikki Haley Visits “America Reports”

Nikki Haley Walks Back Claim That Texas Can Secede From U.S.: ‘They Can’t’

Dana Bash

Nikki Haley

Texas

CNN senior political analyst Nia-Malika Henderson admitted to an amused Dana Bash that President Joe Biden&#8217;s messaging going into the 2024 election cycle has fallen rather flat — in fact, she said it was often simply &#8220;a noun and a verb and January 6.&#8221;
Henderson <a href="https://www.mediaite.com/news/cnns-dana-bash-busts-out-laughing-when-reporter-calls-biden-strategy-a-noun-and-a-verb-and-january-6/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">made the comment</a> during a Wednesday appearance on CNN&#8217;s &#8220;Inside Politics,&#8221; where she explained that the Biden team was going to have to find a way to make things &#8220;fresher&#8221; if they expected to hold onto the White House past 2024.
Referring to former President Donald Trump — who won the Iowa caucuses handily on Monday evening — as a &#8220;wounded candidate,&#8221; Henderson said Biden still needed to be prepared to fight.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
CNN&#39;s Dana Bash Busts Out Laughing When Reporter Calls Biden Strategy &#39;A Noun And A Verb And January 6&#39; <a href="https://t.co/QSsJnsM2KM">https://t.co/QSsJnsM2KM</a> via <a href="https://twitter.com/Mediaite?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@mediaite</a> <a href="https://t.co/kIV9RUyCPR">pic.twitter.com/kIV9RUyCPR</a>
&mdash; Tommy moderna-vaX-Topher (@tommyxtopher) <a href="https://twitter.com/tommyxtopher/status/1747698166621671498?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 17, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;I think if you’re Biden, you can look at what Chris Christie said, those comments, that is an ad in and of itself, the idea that this is a battle for the soul of America, something that Joe Biden said back in 2020,&#8221; she said — but she noted that the Biden team, tying Trump to the Capitol riot on January 6th, 2021, had already repeated that argument ad nauseam.
&#8220;So, listen, you know, I think this argument around democracy is a, it’s an argument they made recently. It’s an argument they made going into 2022,&#8221; she said. &#8220;They do have to figure out a way to make it fresher. Right? Because it can’t just be a noun and a verb and January 6th, right?&#8221;
Bash responded with a laugh as Henderson added, &#8220;It’s got to be much broader than that. And they’re clearly trying to connect it to day-to-day issues.&#8221;
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
At the end of the segment, Bash reminded the audience that Henderson was using Biden&#8217;s own jab against him — one he used during a 2008 primary debate to slam then-Republican candidate Rudy Giuliani for referencing his own experience as Mayor of New York City at the time of the September 11 terrorist attacks.
&#8220;Rudy Giuliani. There&#8217;s only three things he mentions in sentence: a noun, and a verb, and 9/11,&#8221; he said at the time.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
&quot;Rudy Giuliani. There&#39;s only three things he mentions in sentence: a noun, and a verb, and 9/11.&quot;
&#8212; Joe Biden, 10/30/2007
 <a href="https://t.co/ho4MHEcPf1">pic.twitter.com/ho4MHEcPf1</a>
&mdash; Howard Mortman (@HowardMortman) <a href="https://twitter.com/HowardMortman/status/1735793718584631509?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 15, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Because of Biden&#8217;s tendency to repeat the same stories over and over again, Henderson was not the first to use that construction against him.
Jim Treacher, in 2021, posted, &#8220;Joe Biden once said of Rudy Giuliani: &#8216;Every sentence he says has three things: a noun, a verb, and 9/11.&#8217; Well, every sentence Biden says has a noun, a verb, and his son dying of cancer.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Joe Biden once said of Rudy Giuliani: &quot;Every sentence he says has three things: a noun, a verb, and 9/11.&quot; Well, every sentence Biden says has a noun, a verb, and his son dying of cancer. <a href="https://t.co/WAdCHQA7eY">https://t.co/WAdCHQA7eY</a>
&mdash; jimtreacher.substack.com (@jtLOL) <a href="https://twitter.com/jtLOL/status/1432382038615728128?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 30, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

US-POLITICS-VOTE-VIRUS-BIDEN

CNN Analyst Admits Biden’s Messaging Is Flat: ‘A Noun And A Verb And January 6’

CNN Analyst Admits Biden's Messaging Is Flat: 'A Noun And A Verb And January 6'

2024 Election

Executive

January 6

Joe Biden

Media

Politics

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) said that criticisms of Hamas should be &#8220;balanced&#8221; with criticisms of Israel during a Sunday morning appearance on CNN&#8217;s &#8220;State of the Union,&#8221; and anchor Dana Bash quickly made it clear that she was not having any of that.
Bash began the conversation by pressing Jayapal about Hamas&#8217; use of rape and sexual violence against Israeli women during the brutal terror attack on Israel on October 7th — which left more than 1,200 Israelis dead, many of them women and children. She also noted that there had been a marked silence, particularly from progressive women who claimed to be staunch defenders of women&#8217;s rights, when the victims of such sexualized violence happened to be Israeli.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Rep. Pramila Jayapal on CNN on condemning Hamas&#39;s sexual violence: &quot;I think we have to be balanced about bringing in the outrages against Palestinians.&quot;
Dana Bash replies, &quot;You don&#39;t see Israeli soldiers raping Palestinian women.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/Lac7QI4bHx">pic.twitter.com/Lac7QI4bHx</a>
&mdash; Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) <a href="https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1731392607828201484?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 3, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Jayapal responded by quickly saying that &#8220;of course&#8221; she condemned Hamas and all instances of rape and sexual violence, but pivoted almost immediately to suggest that Israel was not adhering to international law in its response to the October 7th massacre.
&#8220;I’ve seen a lot of Progressive women. Generally speaking, they’re quick to defend women’s rights and to speak out against using rape as a weapon of war, but downright silent on what we saw on October 7th and what might be happening inside Gaza right now to these hostages,&#8221; Bash began. &#8220;Why is that?&#8221;
&#8220;I don’t know that that’s true. I think we always talk about the impact of war on women in particular,&#8221; Jayapal replied, adding that &#8220;of course&#8221; she had condemned Hamas&#8217; use of rape as a weapon of war.
But then she pivoted, saying, &#8220;If they do not comply with international humanitarian law, they are bringing themselves to a place that makes it much more difficult strategically for them to be able to build allies, to keep public opinion with them, and frankly, morally, I think we cannot say that one war crime deserves another. That is not what international humanitarian law says.&#8221;
&#8220;With respect, I was just asking about the women, and you turned it back to Israel. I’m asking you about Hamas,&#8221; Bash pushed back.
&#8220;I already answered your question, Dana. I said it’s horrific, and I think that rape is horrific. Sexual assault is horrific. I think that it happens in war situations. Terrorist organizations like Hamas obviously are using these as tools,&#8221; Jayapal replied, and pivoted again — this time citing the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry&#8217;s claims regarding the alleged civilian death toll.
&#8220;However, I think we have to be balanced about bringing in the outrages against Palestinians. Fifteen thousand Palestinians have been killed in Israeli air strikes, three-quarters of whom are women and children …&#8221; she said.
&#8220;And it’s horrible,&#8221; Bash agreed, stopping Jayapal cold: &#8220;But you don’t see Israeli soldiers raping Palestinian women.&#8221;
Jayapal attempted to deflect once more, pivoting back to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and saying, &#8220;I don’t want this to be the hierarchies of oppression.&#8221;

Progressive Caucus Leaders Address Republican Default Threat In Capitol Hill Press Conference

Female Democrat Demands ‘Balance’ In Condemnation Of Hamas Raping Israeli Women, And CNN’s Dana Bash Stops Her Cold

Female Democrat Demands 'Balance' In Condemnation Of Hamas Raping Israeli Women, And CNN's Dana Bash Stops Her Cold

Hamas

Israel

Pramila Jayapal

Rape

Sexual Assault

State of the Union

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) criticized Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin&#8217;s job performance over the weekend, saying that his actions over the last two months, or a lack thereof, prove to him that Austin is not the right man for the job.
Graham made the remarks during a Sunday interview on CNN&#8217;s &#8220;State of the Union&#8221; with host Dana Bash as U.S. forces have been attacked 75+ times over the last several weeks and the Iranian-backed terrorists behind the attacks have faced little response.
Bash asked Graham about remarks Austin had recently made about Israel needing to reduce the number of alleged civilian casualties inside Gaza as they look to eliminate the terrorists responsible for the October 7 massacre.
&#8220;He said, if you drive civilians into the arms of the enemy, you replace a tactical victory with a strategic defeat, which he&#8217;s saying that civilian casualties could create even more enemies,&#8221; Bash said. &#8220;Does he have a point?&#8221;
Graham responded: &#8220;No. He&#8217;s so naive. I mean, I have just lost all confidence in this guy.&#8221;
&#8220;How about focusing on protecting our soldiers, men and women, in Syria and Iraq? Strategic defeat would be inflaming the Palestinians? They&#8217;re already inflamed,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;They&#8217;re taught from the time they&#8217;re born to hate the Jews and to kill them. They&#8217;re taught math by, if you have 10 Jews, you kill six, how many would you have left?&#8221;
&#8220;It&#8217;s like, this is a tranquil population only inflamed after Israel goes in to defend itself is really naive. This is a radicalized population. I don&#8217;t want to kill innocent people, but Israel is fighting not just Hamas, but the infrastructure around Hamas,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;Look what happened to the Israeli hostages when they were presented to the Palestinian population. It&#8217;s beyond naive. Strategic failure is letting Hamas stand.&#8221;
&#8220;This war has shown to me he doesn&#8217;t understand,&#8221; Graham later added. &#8220;If we were attacked like this, which we were on 9/11, if somebody called for us within two months to have a cease-fire against al Qaeda, that would have been — we&#8217;d have laughed them out of town. We&#8217;d have run them out of town. Secretary Austin is telling Israel things that are impossible to achieve.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Sec. Austin is wrong to suggest that strategic defeat for Israel would be inflaming the Palestinians.
Strategic defeat is letting Hamas stand. <a href="https://t.co/5xilJSH9Ia">pic.twitter.com/5xilJSH9Ia</a>
&mdash; Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) <a href="https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1731335458997620961?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 3, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

US-POLITICS-DEFENSE-HEARING

Senator Graham On Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin: ‘I Have Just Lost All Confidence In This Guy’

Lindsey Graham

Lloyd Austin

<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/alexandria-ocasio-cortez">Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez</a> (D-NY) suggested over the weekend that there are no checks on the U.S. Supreme Court and that there was nothing balancing out their power, despite the fact that those things exist.
The executive branch nominates justices to the Court and Congress has to approve those Justices and can even impeach them if necessary.
AOC made the remarks during a CNN interview on Sunday with host Dana Bash when asked about President Joe Biden saying last week that he opposes expanding the Court because &#8220;if we start the process of trying to expand the court, we&#8217;re going to politicize it maybe forever in a way that is not healthy.&#8221;
AOC said that she &#8220;truly&#8221; believes justices should have their power limited, even though no federal official has unlimited power.
&#8220;The courts, if they were to proceed without any check on their power, without any balance on their power, then we will start to see an undemocratic and, frankly, dangerous authoritarian expansion of power in the Supreme Court, which is what we are seeing now, from the overturning of abortion rights, to the ruling that discrimination and, frankly, stripping the full personhood and dignity of LGBTQ people in the United States,&#8221; she claimed.
&#8220;These are the types of rulings that signal a dangerous creep towards authoritarianism and centralization of power in the court,&#8221; she claimed. &#8220;In fact, we have members of the court themselves, with Justice Elena Kagan, saying that the court is beginning to assume the power of a legislature.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
AOC: &quot;The courts, if they were to proceed without any check on their power, without any balance on their power, then we will start to see an undemocratic and frankly dangerous authoritarian expansion of power in the Supreme Court, which is what we are seeing now.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/pndYqziZHk">pic.twitter.com/pndYqziZHk</a>
&mdash; The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) <a href="https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/status/1675541176307572736?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 2, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT:
<blockquote>DANA BASH: Congresswoman, you have called on President Biden to expand the Supreme Court to 13 justices.
But even after Roe was overruled last year and this past week, what we saw with affirmative action and other cases, I want you to listen to what President Biden said. He just said this on Thursday on MSNBC.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BIDEN: I think, if we start the process of trying to expand the court, we&#8217;re going to politicize it maybe forever in a way that is not healthy.
NICOLLE WALLACE, MSNBC HOST: That you can&#8217;t get back?
BIDEN: That I can&#8217;t get back.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BASH: I&#8217;d like you to respond to that.
And, also, you mentioned a moment ago judicial review. Are you also saying that the justices&#8217; power should somehow be limited?
ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ: I truly do. And this is not a new development in history. This is part of our system of checks and balances.
The courts, if they were to proceed without any check on their power, without any balance on their power, then we will start to see an undemocratic and, frankly, dangerous authoritarian expansion of power in the Supreme Court, which is what we are seeing now, from the overturning of abortion rights, to the ruling that discrimination and, frankly, stripping the full personhood and dignity of LGBTQ people in the United States.
This is &#8212; these are the types of rulings that signal a dangerous creep towards authoritarianism and centralization of power in the court. In fact, we have members of the court themselves, with Justice Elena Kagan, saying that the court is beginning to assume the power of a legislature.
BASH: Congresswoman&#8230;
OCASIO-CORTEZ: And, right now, whether it is expansion of the court&#8230;</blockquote>
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ocasio-cortez-it-is-profoundly-disrespectful-for-clarence-thomas-to-say-blacks-are-not-victims">Ocasio-Cortez: It Is ‘Profoundly Disrespectful’ For Clarence Thomas To Say Blacks Are Not ‘Victims’</a>

US-POLITICS-CONGRESS-GUN

AOC Suggests She Does Not Know Of Any Checks On The Supreme Court

Courts

Supreme Court

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) claimed over the weekend that Supreme Court Justice Clarence was &#8220;profoundly disrespectful&#8221; for <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/clarence-thomas-blasts-ketanji-brown-jacksons-racist-worldview-cancerous-to-young-minds">writing</a> in his concurrence with the Court’s overwhelming 6-3 ruling that race-based college admissions are illegal that blacks are not &#8220;victims.&#8221;
Ocasio-Cortez made the remarks during a Sunday interview on CNN&#8217;s &#8220;State of the Union&#8221; with host Dana Bash.
&#8220;The two black justices on the court, Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, had a really blistering debate that we don&#8217;t usually see in decisions,&#8221; Bash said. &#8220;Here is part of what Justice Thomas wrote.&#8221;
Bash highlighted the following:
<blockquote>Justice Jackson uses her broad observations about statistical relationships between race and select measures of health, wealth and well-being to label all blacks as victims. Her desire to do so is unfathomable to me. &#8230; It is an insult to individual achievement and cancerous to young minds seeking to push through barriers. &#8230; Their race is not to blame for everything &#8212; good or bad &#8212; that happens in their lives.</blockquote>
When asked what her response was to Thomas&#8217; words, AOC responded: &#8220;I mean, what Justice Clarence Thomas wrote there, I believe, is profoundly disrespectful to — to — I just think it was profoundly disrespectful to his colleague.&#8221;
AOC claimed that Thomas wrote what he did about Jackson &#8220;due to some sort of inferior or less than really thought out of a stance.&#8221;
&#8220;I think it&#8217;s profoundly insulting. And I think that he really demonstrated his character, frankly, and his worldview in that critique himself,&#8221; she added.
WATCH:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="‘Profoundly disrespectful’: AOC responds to Justice Thomas’ criticism of Justice Jackson" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/H2_H1hI3BRM?start=215&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>

House Committees Hold Hearings On American Confidence In Elections

Ocasio-Cortez: It Is ‘Profoundly Disrespectful’ For Clarence Thomas To Say Blacks Are Not ‘Victims’

Clarence Thomas

U.S.

Rep. Mark Green (R-NC), chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, slammed Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas during an interview over the weekend over his claims that the number of illegal border crossing have plummeted in recent days.
Green&#8217;s remarks on CNN&#8217;s &#8220;State of the Union&#8221; with Dana Bash come after the U.S. Border Patrol experienced the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-heads-to-beach-after-shattering-all-time-record-with-83000-illegal-aliens-storming-border-in-1-week">highest number</a> of illegal border crossings in history last week at approximately 83,000.
&#8220;What the secretary failed to say is that this week has seen more crossings than any time, any week in our history. Yes, there was some anticipation, and so people started coming across at higher numbers, in fact, record-breaking numbers, at the first part of the week,&#8221; Green said. &#8220;But in the latter part of the week, a judge ruled that they can&#8217;t do their plan of just releasing without a court date, which Secretary Mayorkas has said on the news was a bad idea. But that court ruling said he can&#8217;t do that. The drug cartels have responded, and the numbers have fallen off for a couple of days.&#8221;
&#8220;But he admitted just moments ago that they can&#8217;t predict the peak. CBP said 40 percent increase is expected with Title 42 gone,&#8221; he added. &#8220;That&#8217;s another nine million people in two years. I mean, they have already let 5.04 million encounters and 1.5 million got-aways as they have tried to manage border security and not secure our border.&#8221;
Green said that Congress needed to fix the issue of border security first before working on trying to get the immigration system overhauled.
Green said that he is going to be holding Mayorkas responsible for his actions, or lack thereof, saying that he knows &#8220;for a fact he lied to Congress under oath.&#8221;
&#8220;We have a five-phase — which I have articulated before — a five-phase accountability plan. We&#8217;re going to look into his dereliction of duty, the laws he&#8217;s intentionally violated and not followed,&#8221; he said. &#8220;His job is to execute the laws, not write them or make them up himself. And his interim final rule to just speed people into the country is an excellent example of them just making up the laws, which we are the ones, we write the laws in Congress. He executes the laws, right, as the executive branch.&#8221;
&#8220;We will show the human cost of this open border, fentanyl mothers, Angel Moms, that little baby in Florida crawling around on a VRBO that encountered fentanyl and died,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;I mean, every American is at risk with this open border. I would be negligent in my job not to look into this guy&#8217;s performance.&#8221;
WATCH:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Rep. Green Joins CNN&#039;s State of the Union to Discuss the Ongoing Border Crisis Since Title 42&#039;s End" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/RTchR_0jZ74?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Michael Cohen Hearing

Mark Green Hammers DHS Secretary Mayorkas Over Claims Illegal Border Crossing Have Dropped

Alejandro Mayorkas

Border Crisis

Mark Green

Senator <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/lindsey-graham" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Lindsey Graham</a> (R-SC) sparred with CNN&#8217;s Dana Bash over Democrats&#8217; position on <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/abortion" target="_blank" rel="noopener">abortion</a> on Sunday.
Appearing on CNN&#8217;s &#8220;State of the Union,&#8221; Graham was asked whether he believes abortion is a state or federal issue. Graham voiced his support for a federal abortion ban and said Democrats would oppose any restriction.
&#8220;[I]t&#8217;s a human rights issue,&#8221; Graham said. &#8220;Does it really matter where you&#8217;re conceived? At 15 weeks, you have a developed heart and lungs. And to dismember a child at 15 weeks is a painful experience. It&#8217;s barbaric. It&#8217;s out of line with the rest of the civilized world. Only North Korea and China allow abortion demand up to the moment of birth, except the Democratic Party.&#8221;
&#8220;What the Democratic Party proposes on abortion is barbaric,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;I welcome this debate. I think the Republican Party will be in good standing to oppose late-term abortion, like most of the civilized world.&#8221;
&#8220;Just for the record, Roe went up to viability,&#8221; Bash noted.
Then Graham accused Bash of carrying water for the Democrats. &#8220;No, that&#8217;s no— no, no, quit covering for these guys,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Media, you keep covering for these guys. They introduced legislation that allowed abortion-on-demand with taxpayer-[funding], up to the moment of birth. That was their position in Washington. That&#8217;s the law they want to pass. And nobody in your business will talk about it.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
&quot;No no, quit covering for these guys! No no no, you&#39;re media, you keep covering for these guys!&quot; 
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) goes off on Dana Bash after she says &quot;for the record Roe went up to viability&quot; during discussion on late-term abortion and what should be left to states <a href="https://t.co/s5zbKaWQFf">pic.twitter.com/s5zbKaWQFf</a>
&mdash; The Recount (@therecount) <a href="https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1650126150016876547?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 23, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Democrats in the House of Representatives passed the &#8220;<a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3755/text" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Women&#8217;s Health Protection Act</a>&#8221; in September 2021. The bill allowed abortions at any time and for any reason before fetal viability. It also permitted abortions after the point of fetal viability if a healthcare provider determined that the pregnancy would pose a risk to the mother&#8217;s &#8220;life or health.&#8221; There was no standard for what the word &#8220;health&#8221; meant. That bill failed to overcome a Senate filibuster.
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://onelink.to/dwapp" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-8868">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
Meanwhile, on Friday, the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-releases-decision-on-abortion-pill-mifepristone" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Supreme Court</a> blocked a ruling from a federal judge in Texas that placed restrictions on the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the abortifacient drug mifepristone, which is used in about half of all U.S. abortions. The Supreme Court ruled to allow the approval of the drug while a lawsuit is heard by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, granting requests from the Biden administration and the manufacturer.

WASHINGTON, DC – SEPTEMBER 27: Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.)

‘Quit Covering For These Guys’: Lindsey Graham Erupts On CNN Host Over Democrats’ Radical Abortion Position

Lindsey Graham Erupts On CNN Host Over Democrats' Radical Abortion Position

Abortion

Abortion Drug

Congress

Democrats

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) graduated from Boston University in 2011 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in both international relations and economics.
Maybe she should have taken Law 101.
The bartender-turned-lawmaker on Sunday said President Joe Biden should ignore the ruling of a federal judge who on Friday suspended the two-decade-old approval of the so-called abortion pill mifepristone while a legal challenge proceeds.
The 67-page ruling by U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in Amarillo, Texas, does not go into effect for one week, a delay intended to give the Biden administration the option to file an emergency appeal. The U.S. Department of Justice said it would, Reuters <a href="https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-judge-hands-anti-abortion-groups-partial-win-over-abortion-pill-2023-04-07/">reported</a>.
But forget all that legal stuff. AOC says Biden should just ignore the ruling.
On Sunday morning’s <a href="https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/04/09/sotu-ocasio-cortez-full.cnn">edition</a> of CNN’s &#8220;State of the Union,&#8221; host Dana Bash was blunt with the two-term lawmaker.
&#8220;You called on the Biden administration to do, which is just to simply ignore the court ruling. That’s a pretty stunning position, if you think about it in the abstract about the notion of just ignoring a judge’s position,&#8221; Bash said.
&#8220;So my question is, when this case is resolved by the Supreme Court, should the administration follow that decision, if that decision ends up banning this abortion drug?&#8221; the host asked.
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://onelink.to/dwapp" data-sk="tooltip_parent">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>
&#8220;Well, you know, I want to take a step back and dig into the grounds around ignoring this preliminary ruling as well,&#8221; Ocasio-Cortez said. &#8220;There is an extraordinary amount of precedent for this. There is a term known as agency non-acquiescence, and this has been used. And for folks saying this is a first, that this is precedent-setting, it is not.&#8221;
AOC claimed former President Donald Trump &#8220;did this very thing.&#8221;
&#8220;The idea of consistency in governance until there is a higher court ruling is not an unprecedented thing to happen. In fact, when the Trump administration did it, it was arguably through a much, you know, a very grave issue when it came to DACA,&#8221; the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy that allows illegal aliens who meet program requirements to remain in the U.S.
&#8220;The Trump administration was ordered to fully reinstate DACA, the DACA program. And they, in a complete defiance, did not do that. They rely on the courts, rely on the legitimacy of their rulings. And when they make a mockery of our system, a mockery of our democracy and a mockery of our law as the as what we just saw happen in this mifepristone ruling, then I believe that that the executive branch and we know that the executive branch has an enforcement discretion,&#8221; she said.
Bash returned to her original question: &#8220;Should that apply if the Supreme Court upholds the Texas judge’s decision?&#8221;
&#8220;You know, I think one of the things that I think that we need to examine is the grounds of that ruling. But I do not believe that the courts have the authority to, to have the authority over the FDA that they just asserted. And I do believe that it creates a crisis,&#8221; AOC said.
The views expressed in this piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Joseph Curl has covered politics for 35 years, including 12 years as White House correspondent for a national newspaper. He was also the a.m. editor of the Drudge Report for four years. Send tips to josephcurl@dailywire.com and follow him on Twitter @josephcurl.

ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ

Former Bartender AOC Says Biden Should Ignore Court Ruling, Do What She Says

Former Bartender Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Says Biden Should Ignore Court Ruling, Do What She Says

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

National security adviser Jake Sullivan said that the administration has privately communicated to communist China that there will be consequences if they provide weapons for Russia to use in its war against Ukraine. During the interview, Sullivan also downplayed a new U.S. intelligence report that concluded that the COVID pandemic likely originated in a Chinese lab.
Sullivan made the remarks during a Sunday interview with CNN co-host Dana Bash on the network&#8217;s &#8220;State of the Union.&#8221;
&#8220;We will continue to send a strong message that we believe that sending military aid to Russia at this time, when they are using their weapons to bombard cities, kill civilians and commit atrocities, would be a bad mistake, and China should want no part of it,&#8221; he said.
Sullivan claimed that President Joe Biden has &#8220;clearly and specifically behind closed doors&#8221; told China what the consequences will be if they supply the Russians with weapons.
Sullivan was also asked about a report that appeared in The Wall Street Journal on Sunday that said that a classified intelligence report from the Department of Energy concluded that COVID likely came from a Chinese lab leak.
&#8220;Did the coronavirus pandemic start in a lab?&#8221; she asked. &#8220;Is that what you believe now?&#8221;
&#8220;One of the things in that &#8216;Wall Street Journal&#8217; report which I can&#8217;t confirm or deny, but I will say the reference to the Department of Energy, President Biden specifically requested that the National Labs, which are part of the Department of Energy, be brought into this assessment because he wants to put every tool at use to be able to figure out what happened here,&#8221; he responded. &#8220;And if we gain any further insight or information, we will share it with Congress and we will share it with the American people. But, right now, there is not a definitive answer that has emerged from the intelligence community on this question.&#8221;
WATCH:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="National security adviser warns China about sending weapons to Russia" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/G46wjnkewSI?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>
TRANSCRIPT:
<blockquote>DANA BASH, CNN HOST: Joining me now is President Biden&#8217;s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan.
Thank you so much for joining me this morning.
Director of the CIA Bill Burns says he is confident that China is considering giving lethal aid to Russia. How soon do you believe China could actually start providing that assistance?
JAKE SULLIVAN, U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: Well, first, thanks for having me on, Dana.
The other thing that Director Burns, Bill Burns at the CIA, said was that we haven&#8217;t seen them do it yet. We actually haven&#8217;t seen them take a final decision to provide the aid to Russia. And we haven&#8217;t seen the aid be provided to Russia.
So, we will watch carefully, we will be vigilant, and we will continue to send a strong message that we believe that sending military aid to Russia at this time, when they are using their weapons to bombard cities, kill civilians and commit atrocities, would be a bad mistake, and China should want no part of it.
BASH: If China does go ahead and give the lethal support that your intelligence shows they&#8217;re considering giving to Russia, can you please be specific about how the U.S. would respond?
SULLIVAN: Well, again, you&#8217;re talking about a hypothetical situation, because, at present, China has not moved forward, as far as we can discern. We have not seeing them do it.
And I would prefer to keep our messages to China on this question, what the consequences would be, in the private high-level diplomatic channels that we have established to discuss these issues. Secretary Blinken saw China&#8217;s top diplomat, Wang Yi, just a few days ago in Munich. They had a detailed conversation the subject.
Secretary Blinken laid out the U.S. position in perspective. And I&#8217;m going to leave that important and grave set of conversations around the stakes of China coming in behind Russia in their war in Ukraine for behind closed doors.
BASH: Yes, so, just to be clear, you don&#8217;t want to say it now on international television, but the consequences if, in fact, China, does this have been very directly and specifically communicated to China privately? 
SULLIVAN: President Biden has made clear in previous reflections on this issue, because this is not a new issue. We have been dealing with the question of whether China might provide military aid to Russia going back to the beginning of the conflict.
BASH: Right, but you said that Secretary Blinken made clear&#8230;
SULLIVAN: Right.
The point I was making, Dana, is just that President Biden has said previously, we&#8217;re not just making direct threats. We&#8217;re just laying out both the stakes and the consequences, how things would unfold.
BASH: I see.
SULLIVAN: And we are doing that clearly and specifically behind closed doors.
BASH: How concerned &#8212; just kind of look at this big picture. How concerned are you about these two major U.S. adversaries working together on the battlefield in Ukraine and what that means sort of more generally about the relationships here?
SULLIVAN: Well, look, the U.S. position in this conflict is straightforward.
We&#8217;re not going to stand by and allow one country to roll over another country and try to wipe it off the map. And we&#8217;re going to build and have built a coalition of more than 50 nations to resist that and help the Ukrainians defend their own territory.
China&#8217;s position in this is much more awkward. In fact, there was just a vote at the U.N. General Assembly in which China abstained. They did not vote with Russia. They were one of a number of countries that just tried to stand on the sidelines. When China talks rhetorically about the war in Ukraine, they tie themselves into knots, because they know that going all in with Russia in this war in Ukraine would alienate a substantial number of countries that they are working hard to maintain good relations with.
So, from our perspective, actually, this war presents real complications for Beijing. And Beijing will have to make its own decisions about how it proceeds, whether it provides military assistance. But, if it goes down that road, it will come at real costs to China. And I think China&#8217;s leaders are weighing that as they make their decisions.
BASH: President Zelenskyy is still asking the U.S. for F-16 fighter jets, but President Biden said on Friday that Ukraine doesn&#8217;t need the F-16s now.
I know you said that Ukraine doesn&#8217;t have the training and the maintenance capacity to use the jets, but is the real reason you&#8217;re not giving Ukraine these jets because you&#8217;re trying to balance how far to go in supporting Ukraine without antagonizing Russia too much?
SULLIVAN: The real reason, Dana, is that we are taking a very hard look at what it is that Ukraine needs for the immediate phase of the war that we&#8217;re in.
And this phase of the war requires tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, artillery, tactical air defense systems, so that Ukrainian fighters can retake territory that Russia currently occupies.
F-16s are a question for a later time. And that&#8217;s why President Biden said that, for now, he&#8217;s not moving forward with those. So, as far as we&#8217;re concerned, the U.S. effort has got to be to get Ukraine the tools it needs for the mission at hand. And the mission at hand is to have a successful counteroffensive where Ukraine is able to take back its own territory, away from the hands of the Russians.
BASH: So, you&#8217;re not ruling out giving Ukraine the F-16s at a later time?
SULLIVAN: What President Biden said is what goes across the administration. And he was very clear. He said: I&#8217;m ruling them out for now.
BASH: Got it.
Want to ask about Crimea. Today marks exactly nine years since Russia illegally annexed Crimea. The Biden administration still repeatedly says that Crimea is part of Ukraine. You also say that Ukraine gets to define what victory look like. So I want you to sort of give a yes-or- no answer to this.
If Ukraine decided that victory means recapturing Crimea militarily, would the United States support that?
SULLIVAN: Dana, I can&#8217;t give a yes-or-no answer to what is a hypothetical question.
Right now, what President Zelenskyy is focused on is getting into the best possible position on the battlefield, so that he can be in the best possible position at the negotiating table. And he spoke as recently as this week about diplomacy.
We want to help Ukraine turn battlefield gains into diplomatic leverage. And that requires us to give them the military assistance they need to make those gains. What ultimately happens with Crimea in the context of this war and a settlement of this war is something for the Ukrainians to determine, with the support of the United States.
But I&#8217;m just not going to get into hypothetical questions, because what we&#8217;re facing today is a counteroffensive in the east and the south that we need to give them the tools to fight, and we are doing that.
BASH: You&#8217;re talking about supporting Ukraine, and you&#8217;re talking about them taking the lead on how they define victory, which is understandable. It&#8217;s their war.
But the administration is also promising them that America will support them as long as it takes. Can you level with the American people about what expectations should be? Could there still be a full- blown war going on a year from now, on the second anniversary, that the U.S. is still supporting at the levels it is now?
SULLIVAN: I can level with the American people in saying that war is unpredictable.
One year ago, we were all bracing for the fall of Kyiv in a matter &#8212; in a matter of days. One year later, Joe Biden was standing with President Zelenskyy in Kyiv declaring that Kyiv stands.
So, I cannot predict the future, and nor can anyone else. And anyone who is suggesting they can define for you how and when this war will end is not leveling with the American people or anyone else.
What I can say is that the United States is going to continue to marshal this wide international coalition of countries to provide Ukraine with the tools that it needs to defend itself and to take back territory that the Russians have occupied. And we are prepared to do that. We have the staying power for that. We have proven we can sustain unity.
We have proven that we can sustain this level of effort. And President Biden went to Kyiv to indicate that our support will be unwavering.
BASH: Before I let you go, I want to ask about a new &#8220;Wall Street Journal&#8221; report out this morning that a classified intelligence report from the Department of Energy concludes that the coronavirus pandemic most likely did not emerge naturally, but it did come from a laboratory leak.
Did the coronavirus pandemic start in a lab? Is that what you believe now?
SULLIVAN: Well, Dana, there is a variety of views in the intelligence community. Some elements of the intelligence community have reached conclusions on one side, some on the other. A number of them have said they just don&#8217;t have enough information to be sure.
Here&#8217;s what I can tell you. President Biden has directed repeatedly every element of our intelligence community to put effort and resources behind getting to the bottom of this question. And one of the things in that &#8220;Wall Street Journal&#8221; report which I can&#8217;t confirm or deny, but I will say the reference to the Department of Energy, President Biden specifically requested that the National Labs, which are part of the Department of Energy, be brought into this assessment because he wants to put every tool at use to be able to figure out what happened here.
And if we gain any further insight or information, we will share it with Congress and we will share it with the American people. But, right now, there is not a definitive answer that has emerged from the intelligence community on this question.
BASH: Jake Sullivan, the president&#8217;s national security adviser, thank you so much for joining me this morning.
SULLIVAN: Thanks for having me, Dana.</blockquote>
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a>

Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre And National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan Hold Monday’s White House Briefing

Biden National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan Downplays Report Saying COVID Likely Came From Chinese Lab

Communist China

COVID-19

Jake Sullivan

Ukraine-Russia War

World

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), who was recently booted off the House Intelligence Committee, faced scrutiny during an interview on Sunday over past examples of him allegedly politicizing intelligence information for partisan gain.
Schiff made the remarks during an interview on CNN&#8217;s &#8220;State of the Union&#8221; with host Dana Bash while talking about losing his spot on the committee.
&#8220;You said that there was direct evidence of the fact that Donald Trump colluded with Russia back in 2016. Special counsel Robert Mueller said in his report — quote — &#8216;The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government,'&#8221; Bash said. &#8220;Republicans argue that&#8217;s proof that you used your position the Intelligence Committee to intentionally mislead Americans, which is why you should not be on that committee.&#8221;
Schiff claimed that the report did not say that and that the report revealed that then-candidate Donald Trump&#8217;s campaign manager shared internal campaign polling data with a Russian agent. &#8220;To most Americans, that is collusion,&#8221; he claimed. &#8220;Now, whether it&#8217;s proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the crime of conspiracy — that&#8217;s what Bob Mueller was talking about — I have always distinguished between the two.&#8221;
Bash responded by highlighting another example that Republicans point to when they mention the problems that they have with Schiff being on the Intelligence Committee.
&#8220;Ahead of the first Trump impeachment, you said the committee had not spoken to a whistle-blower,&#8221; Bash said. &#8220;In fact, that turned out not to be true.&#8221;
&#8220;When I was asked the question, I thought they were referring to whether we had brought the whistle-blower in,&#8221; Schiff claimed. &#8220;And I should have been more clear in my answer.&#8221;
Bash noted that &#8220;The Washington Post&#8221; fact-check team said that his claim about whistleblower were false.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Democrat Adam Schiff triples down on the Russian collusion hoax. <a href="https://t.co/T4HmvT1QVe">pic.twitter.com/T4HmvT1QVe</a>
&mdash; RNC Research (@RNCResearch) <a href="https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1619710699894095873?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 29, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
&quot;Ahead of the first Trump impeachment, you said the committee had not spoken to a whistleblower. In fact, that turned out not to be true.&quot;
ADAM SCHIFF: &quot;I should&#39;ve been more clear.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/6qZsQbTwdE">pic.twitter.com/6qZsQbTwdE</a>
&mdash; RNC Research (@RNCResearch) <a href="https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1619711370345287681?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 29, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
TRANSCRIPT:
<blockquote>BASH: And, Congressman, I will start with you.
You said that there was direct evidence of the fact that Donald Trump colluded with Russia back in 2016. Special counsel Robert Mueller said in his report &#8212; quote &#8212; &#8220;The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government.&#8221;
Republicans argue that&#8217;s proof that you used your position the Intelligence Committee to intentionally mislead Americans, which is why you should not be on that committee.
REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): If you read the Mueller report, he makes clear even in the first few pages of the report that he states no conclusion on whether Donald Trump and his campaign colluded with the Russians.
But what he does reveal in his report, what we found in our investigation is that Donald Trump&#8217;s campaign manager was sharing internal campaign polling data and a strategy for key battleground states with an agent of Russian intelligence, while that same unit of Russian intelligence was helping the Trump campaign, both with the hacking-and-dumping operation, as well as a social media operation to elect Donald Trump.
To most Americans, that is collusion. Now, whether it&#8217;s proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the crime of conspiracy &#8212; that&#8217;s what Bob Mueller was talking about &#8212; I have always distinguished between the two.
But let me just set the record straight. This is only one of a shifting series of rationalizations and pretexts that McCarthy is using.
BASH: Well, let me give you another. He says that this is part of the pattern. Ahead of the first Trump impeachment, you said the committee had not spoken to a whistle-blower. In fact, that turned out not to be true.
You know &#8220;The Washington Post&#8221; said so in their fact-check.
SCHIFF: &#8220;The Washington Post&#8221; identified that, yes, before the person became a whistle-blower, they sought advice from the committee.
When I was asked the question, I thought they were referring to whether we had brought the whistle-blower in. And I should have been more clear in my answer.
But, again, let&#8217;s be clear what&#8217;s really going on here. McCarthy has said Adam Schiff prosecuted the case against Trump. Ukraine impeachment was a hoax. He&#8217;s given 15 explanations. The only real explanation is, he needs Marjorie Taylor Greene&#8217;s vote. He needs Paul Gosar&#8217;s vote. He wants to retaliate for their removal from the committee.
And, apparently, he believes I was very effective in exposing his misconduct, Donald Trump&#8217;s misconduct. And that&#8217;s what they&#8217;re trying to stop. So, I think that he benefits from having these smears repeated. And that&#8217;s part of what he gains from it. But this is a pretext, and nothing more.
&#8230;&#8230;..
BASH: Well, let me ask you, Congressman.
You are Jewish. And you have said that you were worried about some tropes that the congressman (sic) used, and &#8212; which again, I want to be clear, you apologized for that, for that one, all about the Benjamins. Do you believe that the pattern that your caller here has put out there is, as Republicans are saying and some Democrats say, rise to the level of antisemitism?
SCHIFF: Dana, I believe that this is all a pretext.
And if you look at the leader of the Republican Party, Donald Trump, he is dining with white nationalists and antisemites. The people that Kevin McCarthy just put on committees like Marjorie Taylor Greene and others are speaking at white nationalist rallies.
This is, as my colleague said, Bakersfield B.S. This is all pretextual. And I don&#8217;t accept the premise that this has anything to do with the conduct of any of the Democratic members. This is merely the weakness of Kevin McCarthy&#8217;s speakership, that he&#8217;s so reliant on these extreme members.
I mean, how can you, on the one hand, suggest that these are &#8212; some kind of legitimate basis for unseating Democrats on committees, and put someone like George Santos on any committee? The hypocrisy just grabs you by the throat.
So I don&#8217;t want to dignify the pretext that they&#8217;re giving for any of us. What they&#8217;re doing is really catering to the most extreme members of their conference.</blockquote>

Senate Impeachment Trial Of President Trump Continues

CNN Grills Adam Schiff Over False Impeachment Claims: ‘In Fact, That Turned Out Not To Be True’

Adam Schiff

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) claimed during an interview broadcast on Sunday that she did not know that she was &#8220;trafficking in anti-Semitism&#8221; by making alleged anti-Semitic remarks.
Omar&#8217;s comments on CNN&#8217;s &#8220;State of the Union&#8221; come as she faces the prospect of being removed from the House Foreign Affairs Committee over her <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/02/11/its-all-about-benjamins-baby-ilhan-omar-again-accused-anti-semitism-over-tweets/">previous statements</a> and hostility toward Israel.
&#8220;I might have used words at the time that I didn&#8217;t understand were trafficking in antisemitism,&#8221; she said. &#8220;When that was brought to my attention, I apologized. I owned up to it. That&#8217;s the kind of person that I am.&#8221;
Omar claimed that Republicans wanting to hold her accountable for her previous comments was &#8220;politically motivated.&#8221;
Host Dana Bash brought up some of Omar&#8217;s past remarks and actions.
“I&#8217;m told that Republicans presented a list in their meeting, in a private meeting, this past week,&#8221; Bash said. &#8220;Included in that list is that you said that Israel hypnotized the world. You said Israel is an apartheid regime, that politicians with pro-Israel stance &#8211; stances were all about the Benjamins, which you very notably apologized for, that you support the BDS movement, which a lot of people think is rooted in antisemitism, compared the U.S. and Israel to Hamas and the Taliban.”
Omar responded: &#8220;I certainly did not or was not aware that the word hypnotize was a trope. I wasn&#8217;t aware of the fact that there are tropes about Jews and money. That has been a very enlightening part of this journey.&#8221;
&#8220;To insinuate that I knowingly said these things, when people have read into my comments to make it sound as if I have something against the Jewish community, is so wrong,&#8221; she continued.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar claims on CNN that she was &quot;not aware that the word &#39;hypnotized&#39; was a trope&quot; and &quot;wasn&#39;t aware of the fact that there are tropes about Jews and money.&quot;
Give me a break. That&#39;s BS. <a href="https://t.co/YesRd4RpNI">pic.twitter.com/YesRd4RpNI</a>
&mdash; Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) <a href="https://twitter.com/SteveGuest/status/1619717721452875776?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 29, 2023</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
TRANSCRIPT:
<blockquote>DANA BASH, CNN HOST:  Well, let me ask you, Congresswoman Omar, about what Republicans are saying about you, that there is a pattern of antisemitic and other controversial statements that make you unfit to sit on, in your case, the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
I&#8217;m told that Republicans presented a list in their meeting, in a private meeting, this past week. Included in that list is that you said that Israel hypnotized the world. You said Israel is an apartheid regime, that politicians with pro-Israel stance &#8212; stances were all about the Benjamins, which you very notably apologized for, that you support the BDS movement, which a lot of people think is rooted in antisemitism, compared the U.S. and Israel to Hamas and the Taliban.
I want to give you a chance to respond to all of that, which they say is a clear pattern. 
REP. ILHAN OMAR (D-MN): Yes, I might have used words at the time that I didn&#8217;t understand were trafficking in antisemitism. When that was brought to my attention, I apologized. I owned up to it. That&#8217;s the kind of person that I am.
And I continue to work with my colleagues and my community to fight against antisemitism. Now, I have never compared or made any comparisons. What I was referencing was a case that was in front of the ICC. And if they want to debate political differences, and that&#8217;s something that we should all have the opportunity to do so, but to smear someone and their character, their love for their country and the work that they get to do on a committee is wrong.
And it is politically motivated. And, in some cases, it&#8217;s motivated by the fact that many of these members don&#8217;t believe a Muslim, a refugee, an African should even be in Congress, let alone have the opportunity to serve on the Foreign Affairs Committee.
BASH: You have said that before.
It sounds like you&#8217;re accusing Kevin McCarthy of racism.
OMAR: I mean, I&#8217;m not making any accusations. I&#8217;m just laying out the facts.
You remember Donald Trump coming into my state and saying, Muslims, Somali refugees are infiltrating our country. You remember Marjorie Taylor Greene coming to Congress after Rashida and I got sworn in and saying, Muslims are infiltrating Congress. You remember Boebert saying that I was a terrorist.
What did McCarthy do? He said, she apologized, and we don&#8217;t have to worry about her Islamophobia.
That never happened.
And so these people are OK with Islamophobia. They&#8217;re OK with trafficking in their own ways in antisemitism. They are not OK with having a Muslim have a voice on that committee.
&#8230;&#8230;..
BASH: I just &#8212; I do, though, want to ask, because this has been out there. And it is definitely a big issue that we we&#8217;re going to &#8212; we&#8217;re going to hear a lot more about on the House floor next week, Congresswoman.
So when you apologized for the &#8212; all about the Benjamins comment, you said: &#8220;Antisemitism is real. And I&#8217;m grateful for Jewish allies and colleagues who are educating me on the painful history of antisemitic tropes.&#8221;
What did you learn?
OMAR: A lot.
I certainly did not or was not aware that the word hypnotize was a trope. I wasn&#8217;t aware of the fact that there are tropes about Jews and money. That has a been very enlightening part of this journey.
To insinuate that I knowingly said these things, when people have read into my comments to make it sound as if I have something against the Jewish community, is so wrong. If you remember, when I first got elected to Congress, it was when the FBI report came out on the rise of antisemitism. As a rep-elected, the first op-ed I wrote was on that report, which I talked about how it was important for us, as a community, to coalesce around the Jewish community and fight against antisemitism.
I voted for every single resolution &#8212; no Republican can say that &#8212; condemning antisemitism. My work is clear. The collaboration and work that I do with my Jewish colleagues is very clear. The reason that the Democratic Caucus has not removed me and will not support my removal on the Foreign Affairs Committee is because I have done the work&#8230;
BASH: Do you think you will have&#8230;
OMAR: &#8230; to make sure that I do not support any bigotry.
BASH: Two Republicans have already come out in support of you, saying that they won&#8217;t vote to remove you. They can lose, what, one other, maybe two others. Do you think, next week, when the House votes, that you will have enough votes? And have you talked to other Republicans?
OMAR: What I do know is that the two Republicans that have been public and some that have privately said that they are not going to vote to remove me are doing so because they don&#8217;t want to be seen as hypocrites. They have taken a position in the last Congress, and they will continue to do that.
And I believe that that is a really important piece here, because threat stance to stand behind to members that were accused of inciting violence and threatening the lives of members of Congress was to say the minority &#8212; that the majority should not have the job of removing the minority from their committees.
And I hope that they keep their word.</blockquote>
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/republican-nancy-mace-again-defends-anti-semite-racist-socialist-ilhan-omar">Republican Nancy Mace Again Defends ‘Anti-Semite,’ ‘Racist,’ ‘Socialist’ Ilhan Omar</a>

Ilhan Omar

Ilhan Omar On Her History Of Anti-Semitism: ‘I Didn’t Understand’ I Was ‘Trafficking In Anti-Semitism’

Ilhan Omar On Her History Of Anti-Semitism: 'I Didn't Understand' I Was 'Trafficking In Anti-Semitism'

Anti-Semitism

Menu