Border Patrol Official Says White House Is Perpetuating False Narrative Amid Reports of Haitian Migrants Being ‘Whipped’

A top Border Patrol official has accused Jen Psaki and the White House of “perpetuating the narrative that police are bad” and pushing incorrect information after the press secretary responded to reports that border agents in Del Rio have been “whipping” Haitian migrants who’ve gathered there in recent days.

Speaking to The Epoch Times, Border Patrol agent and head of the National Border Patrol Council, Brandon Judd, said agents on horseback in the area have not been rounding up Haitian refugees with whips after they were accused of doing so by multiple media outlets and officials.

On Monday, Sawyer Hackett, executive director of People First Future, a political action committee set up by Democrat Julián Castro, went viral on Twitter when he shared photos of border patrol agents on horseback as they held their “whips” while Haitian refugees stood near them on foot.

Hackett wrote on Twitter, “This is unfathomable cruelty towards people fleeing disaster and political ruin. The administration must stop this.”

He also shared video footage showing border agents on horseback attempting to prevent migrants from wading back and forth across a river.

The post was quickly shared over 27,000 times, including by members of Congress Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Senator Jeff Merkley.

A report from the El Paso Times regarding the situation in Del Rio also went viral. An exert from it claims a border agent “swung his whip menacingly” at Haitian men who were trying to cross the river again after buying food and water in Ciudad Acuña, Mexico.

Illegal immigrants cross the Rio Grande between Del Rio (far side) and Acuna, Mexico. Some are crossing back to Mexico to avoid deportation from the United States, in Acuna, Mexico, on Sept. 20, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)
Epoch Times Photo
Illegal migrants cross the Rio Grande River near a temporary migrant camp under the international bridge on Sept. 18, 2021, in Del Rio, Texas. (Jordan Vonderhaar/Getty Images)

“That’s your ‘defund the police’ movement right there,” Judd said of the video. “They only show a short segment of a video. The horse patrol agents under the administration are trained to ensure the safety of the migrants, to keep them away from the horses, because the horses can harm people—they can inadvertently step on them, they can rear up, they can kick them.

“And so agents have to keep the migrants away from the horses for their own protection. And so they will use the reins, to twirl the reins, so that they will stay away from the horses. But they do not use those reins to lash out, to try to strike people. Those agents did not use those reins in any way, shape, or form to try to strike anybody.”

Judd added that the horses are also used as a “deterrent technique” to prevent illegal immigrants from coming into the United States.

The claims of whipping soon reached the White House, with press secretary Jen Psaki telling reporters during a briefing Monday, that she had seen some of the footage but didn’t yet have all the context.

“I can’t imagine what context would make that appropriate,” Psaki said. “But I don’t have additional details.”

When asked if the agents who were accused of whipping the Haitian immigrants should be fired, Psaki responded, “And, certainly—I don’t have additional context.  I don’t think anyone seeing that footage would think it was acceptable or appropriate.”

Judd says Psaki ‘s comments were “horrific” and only serve to perpetuate the narrative that law enforcement is bad. “And that just feeds into the larger, very liberal, narrative of defund the police,” he said.

The head of the National Border Patrol Council said his agents also feel abandoned by the administration, noting that the Haitian camp has turned into a “warzone refugee camp” and pointing out a key difference between former President Donald Trump’s administration and the current Biden administration.

“They [border patrol agents] have been abandoned by the administration. I mean, I get that all the time. My agents are constantly reaching out to me asking, ‘Why isn’t this administration standing up and doing something to secure the border?’ ‘Why is this administration allowing cartels to have free rein of the border?’ ‘Why is this administration [doing nothing] when they said that they were going to have humane immigration practices? I don’t know,” Judd said.

“You tell me, does this look like it’s humane right here?” he asked standing in front of the Haitian camp.

“This looks like a warzone refugee camp. That’s what this looks like. And if anybody says that this is humane, I would love for them to come and explain to me how this, right here, is humane. But this is the Biden administration. This never happened with the Trump administration.”

Charlotte Cuthbertson contributed to this report.

Katabella Roberts

Follow

Katabella Roberts is a reporter currently based in Turkey. She covers news and business for The Epoch Times, focusing primarily on the United States.





Source link

Border Patrol Union Head Rips Jen Psaki and Busts Another False Narrative About CBP Agents Using ‘Whips’ – RedState

Because everything must be absurd, we are now on day two of the mainstream media and mainline Democrats, including from the White House, accusing Border Patrol agents of whipping Haitian immigrants from horseback. It doesn’t matter that within five minutes of the picture going viral, it was apparent that there were no whips involved. The racial narrative must go on, no matter how false.

That continued this morning when Jen Psaki doubled down on the lie, again calling the pictures “horrific” and generally throwing the CBP agents involved under the bus. The original accusation also began to morph. Once it became impossible to deny that the “whips” were actually reins, the attacks from the left then focused on the fact that a video showed the reins being twirled toward illegal immigrants, with the insinuation being that the agents were going to use them as weapons.

Now, the head of the Border Patrol union, Brandon Judd, is now speaking out, and not only did he slam Psaki, but he explained exactly what the CBP agents are trained to do and why. This per Just the News.

“There are very few things that will boil my blood as bad as the White House directly coming out and condemning an action before they know what happened,” Judd told Just the News during an interview on the John Solomon Reports podcast. “Jen Psaki came out yesterday, and she condemned these actions, when in reality, it is a legitimate law enforcement action. This was meant to protect the illegal aliens.”

Judd explained agents are trained for crowd control by the Homeland Security Department to “twirl the reins” if humans start approaching their horses to keep them away from getting injured, and the reins are never used to strike or harm people.

So there you have it. Even the latest freak-out involving the twirling of reins toward illegal immigrants has a perfectly logical, perfectly justifiable explanation. Horses are dangerous. Anybody that gets too close risks getting kicked or trampled. That’s why CBP agents use long reins as a crowd control device, not to hit people, but to warn them to stay back so they don’t get hurt. In other words, these CBP agents are being viciously attacked for literally trying to make sure these illegal immigrants remain unharmed. It’s insane — but so is everything about our current political moment.

Further, as Judd notes, Psaki and others are simply ignorant and have no business commenting on things they don’t understand. Worse, these political hacks aren’t even attempting to understand. It’d be one thing if Psaki made a mistake, got educated, and corrected it. Instead, she’s pretending to be fully aware of what those agents were doing and what’s happening at the border. Never mind that it’s her boss that caused the humanitarian crisis we are seeing in Del Rio and elsewhere.

What the Biden administration is doing is incredibly destructive. They’re actively undermining the Border Patrol and preventing them from doing even basic enforcement. Crowd control is not a human rights violation, especially when we are talking about people rushing the border.

Yet, the White House is too cowardly to stand for the rule of law and take necessary action to stop the current crisis. Instead, they’d rather go on “news” programs and lie about CBP agents. It’s a total betrayal of trust, and it’s only going to further sink Biden’s standing with the American people.



Source link

“We Believe We Can Prove They Made False Statements in Court”




MUST SEE: VoterGA’s Garland Favorito Following Monday’s Hearing: “We Believe We Can Prove They Made False Statements in Court”




















Tap here to add The Western Journal to your home screen.





Source link

Border patrol union boss slams Psaki, media for false story about horse-mounted agents

The president of the union that represents border patrol agents on Tuesday excoriated the White House and news media for falsely suggesting horse-mounted officers were abusing illegal immigrants, saying the leather objects in viral video footage were not whips but rather reins sanctioned by the Biden administration to protect people from getting too close to the animals.

Brandon Judd, a border agent himself and president of the National Border Patrol Council, singled out White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki for condemning the agents conduct as “horrible to watch” and something “they should never be able to do” again.

“There are very few things that will boil my blood as bad as the White House directly coming out and condemning an action before they know what happened,” Judd told Just the News during an interview on the John Solomon Reports podcast. “Jen Psaki came out yesterday, and she condemned these actions, when in reality, it is a legitimate law enforcement action. This was meant to protect the illegal aliens.”

Judd explained agents are trained for crowd control by the Homeland Security Department to “twirl the reins” if humans start approaching their horses to keep them away from getting injured, and the reins are never used to strike or harm people.

“We have to keep those individuals away from the horses,” he explained. “If they get too close to the horses, the horses could step on them and they could break bones. They could kick them. They can get kicked in the head. It could cause death.

“Nobody was hit by those reins; they are not whips. The reins are used to control the horses. And so the reins will be twirled to keep people away from the horses for their protection.” 

The union chief compared Psaki’s comments and the media coverage to deceptive tactics used by liberal activists to argue for defunding the police.

“Of course, this is exactly how the defund police movement works,” he said. “You take photos, you take a 15-second video of something that happened over a period of 10 minutes. And you take those very small clips, and you blow them up and say, ‘Well, look what’s happening.’ When in reality it was a law enforcement movement that agents are trained to use the reins to keep people away, not hit people with those reins.”

The twirling of the reins, Judd said, is included in the sanctioned training for border patrol agents.

“This is a training module that they set up, that they go through and they approve, and even this administration, every single administration, when they come in, they will look at all training that is being given, and they will decide whether the way they want to continue on with training,” he explained. “And this administration even decided that they would continue on with the training of using the reins, to keep people away from the horses for their own protection.”

Asked whether the media and White House accounts were inaccurate, Judd answered: “They are factually wrong, yes. And the White House knows that they’re factually wrong.”

Mark Morgan, who served as the acting commissioner of the Customs and Border Protection Agency for President Trump and head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement under President Obama, confirmed Judd’s account that the use of the reins is an approved tactic for crowd control.

“They were simply doing their job as trained,” he said. “They aren’t whips. They don’t strike people. They are simply keeping people from being hurt by a large 900-pound-or-more animal.”Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas ordered an investigation into the CBP agents use of the horses, but Border Patrol chief Raul Ortiz acknowledged he made the decision to deploy the horse-mounted agents to “find out if we had any individuals in distress, and be able to provide information and intelligence as to what the smuggling organizations were doing in and around the river.”



Source link

Saying ‘I’m No Expert’ Is False Modesty, So Stop It

(nortonrsx/Getty Images)

The nonexpert disclaimer is an act of false modesty and shouldn’t be a prerequisite for voicing an opinion.

We’ve all heard someone start a sentence with, “I’m not a legal expert, but . . .” as if not having gone to law school is something to apologize for. You can sub in other words for “legal,” and you get a general form for sentence starters in many conversations. These sentence starters operate as disclaimers, alerting those listening as to one’s nonexpert status.

It’s funny to think about the topics that prompt people to issue nonexpert disclaimers. Legal issues, yes. Scientific issues, yes. Medical issues, yes. In other words, people tend to emphasize their nonexpert status when voicing opinions on topics in highly credentialed fields. (In a country where every citizen is equal under the law, the tendency is especially pernicious on legal issues — more on that in due course.)

People don’t say, “I’m not a restaurant expert” at the start of a Yelp review. They don’t say, “I’m not a highway expert” before offering their views on road design or traffic congestion. “I’m no cinema expert” has never preceded a movie recommendation.

But it goes for more politically charged issues, too. Lack of expertise on the insurance industry doesn’t seem to hinder people’s ability to speak their minds on the cost of health care. It’s been demonstrated repeatedly that many who call for gun control know next to nothing about gun sales, gun laws, gun manufacturing, or gun operation, yet they opine with full conviction and a clean conscience.

So why the nonexpert disclaimers for the highly credentialed fields? Really, those are the ones where your lack of expertise is most obvious and doesn’t need stating. The Bureau of Labor Statistics says there are about 650,000 lawyers in America, and there are about 330 million Americans, so you’re probably not one of them. Doctor is the really obvious one. Doctors are addressed as such, and if you’re not called “Dr.,” we all know you’re not a doctor.

The nonexpert disclaimer, when used, probably comes from a good place. It’s an attempt at showing deference to people who know more than you do. There’s nothing wrong with that instinct. Nobody likes a know-it-all, so you try not to be one.

But people who offer a nonexpert disclaimer proceed to offer their opinions anyway. It’s a bit like the classic line “I don’t want to get political but . . . ,” which invariably means someone is about to offer his or her hyperpartisan take on a hot-button issue. Users of that line actually did want to get political, and pretending otherwise is somewhat dishonest.

Similarly, “Hey, I don’t think I know enough to have an opinion on something, but please listen to it anyway” doesn’t really make sense. If you don’t think your opinion is any good, it should be common courtesy that you wouldn’t waste other people’s time by sharing it with them. You clearly do think your opinion is worth voicing, so why pretend otherwise?

The nonexpert disclaimer, then, is false modesty. It’s an act. It should stop.

If you’re not an accountant, don’t try to advise me on my taxes — but you can tell me what you think of the tax system. You can have opinions on things you’re not an expert on. In fact, as a citizen in a representative republic, you’re expected to. It’s called “voting.” By casting a ballot, you’re choosing a package of policies that the candidate you supported will pursue. You’re certainly not an expert on all of those policy areas, and you’re probably not an expert on any of them. Yet you still vote. Expressing nonexpert opinions is not all that different.

There’s nothing to be ashamed of in not being an expert on the law. Of the current members of Congress — the people who write the laws — only 36 percent have law degrees. At first, it’s tempting to think it’s a bad thing that so many of the people in charge of making laws lack expertise in law. But, if anything, 36 percent is too high. The ideal legislature is not a committee of lawyers fine-tuning the laws to some expert-defined standard. That’s the false promise of administrative law. It’s a one-way road to unrepresentative, unaccountable government. The law applies to everyone, and therefore it should not be so complex that it takes expert training to understand.

If you’re a Christian, you believe in a religion whose central figure chose as His apostles a bunch of fishermen and government employees. Those were the people He entrusted to spread the Gospel to the ends of the earth, not the religious experts. (Paul was a religious expert, and he famously had to go through quite the ordeal before he would come to serve Christ.) Christ does not set expertise as a precondition to following Him. As always, there’s wisdom in His approach.

If you ever talk to experts on something, you’ll notice that they are often fully aware of the things they don’t know. You’ll commonly hear them refer to the work of other people — the people they believe to be experts. The limits of the human mind are such that individuals can’t really be experts on anything too broad. Some of the most valuable knowledge many experts have is knowing which other experts to talk to.

The flip side of the limits of expertise is that everyone is an expert on something. Talk to anyone for more than five minutes about his or her job, and you’re guaranteed to learn something you didn’t know before. Ask people about their hobbies, and you’re likely to find comprehensive knowledge of football or a board game or cooking. People also just find certain things really interesting and read a ton about them. That applies even to children. There are plenty of middle-schoolers out there who know more about animals or cars or geography than 95 percent of adults will ever know.

Access to expertise is the easiest it has ever been. You need only two things: Internet access and literacy. The vast majority of Americans have both. If you feel bad about not being an expert on something, you can easily read what experts say and let it inform your opinions. In fact, you should read what experts say so that your opinions will have more credibility and be better formed before you express them to others.

Of course, the ease of access to expertise comes with even easier access to garbage. There are lots of wrong things on the Internet, and lots of people have poorly informed, bad opinions — it’s true! Those poorly informed, bad opinions have real, negative consequences. Democracy is a very expensive way to make decisions. It would be much more efficient to shut all the idiots out and let the smart people decide for everyone.

But that’s no way to run a free country. And using a nonexpert disclaimer to ritually denounce your own opinion before you voice it is no way for citizens in a free country to act.

If citizens took it as their duty to be well-informed and coherent when presenting their opinions, we would all be better off. But they do not have a duty to acquire a professional degree. They do not have a duty to earn a credential. And they do not have a duty to genuflect to the people who do have degrees and credentials.

I’m not a lawyer, a doctor, or an engineer, and you probably aren’t either. Who cares? You have a God-given, constitutionally protected right to have an opinion on whatever you please. You also have duties to yourself, your family, your community, your country, mankind, and the divine. Responsibly exercising your rights and fulfilling your duties is your highest calling as a citizen — and there’s no credential for that.

Dominic Pino is a William F. Buckley Fellow in Political Journalism at National Review Institute.





Source link

White House Peddles False Claim about Low Vaccination Rates in Florida, Texas

White House press secretary Jen Psaki is using a misleading argument about COVID-19 vaccination rates in Florida and Texas to justify the Biden administration’s decision to curb the supply of monoclonal antibodies — an effective treatment option for COVID-19 — being distributed to these states.

The federal government has only recently decided to take over the distribution of  the antibody treatments, which Florida governor Ron DeSantis was an early proponent of. Abruptly, the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced on Tuesday that it would be cutting the supply provided to Florida. The administration “did not provide any indication





Source link

Another Hysterical Claim Involving Kids and COVID-19 Bites the Dust – RedState

The argument over how to handle COVID-19 regarding children has been perhaps the most absurd aspect of our response to the coronavirus. Many districts kept kids out of the classroom for over a year in response to a virus that statistically isn’t dangerous to them. Then there are the insane masking requirements, which studies have repeatedly disproven as necessary.

But they were “doing something,” and that’s what really matters when one’s entire existence centers around the signaling of virtue. Yet, to justify their actions, another talking point arose over the last several months. You see, even though children are obviously at extremely low risk from death regarding COVD-19, they are at significant risk of getting “long COVID” the hysterics have asserted. And if you don’t care about “long COVID,” then you don’t care about kids.

So is that true? A new study out of the United Kingdom provides a definitive answer: Nope.

Here’s the most incredible statistic, though. Children in the control group of children who hadn’t been infected had a higher rate of symptoms than children who actually had COVID at certain points in the reporting period (4 and 12 weeks).

What that does is expose the original fallacy that so many were operating under, i.e. taking symptoms present in children and giving them the label of “long COVID” when those symptoms were never proven to be caused by COVID-19 at all. Now, this extremely detailed study shows that many of the symptoms in question are common among children with or without a prior coronavirus infection.

This is the same mistake people make with masks. Despite the fact that data sets continually show mask-mandates don’t work, every time someone who is anti-mask gets infected, there is a rush to blame the lack of a mask for said infection. Yet, what science tells us is that people who do and don’t wear masks get infected at essentially the same rates. In short, the mask is largely irrelevant to the question of spread just like “long COVID” is largely irrelevant to the question of risk for children.

That’s not to say it’s impossible for a child, especially one with pre-existing conditions, to develop long-term symptoms due to COVID. Anything is possible at some infinitesimal level, including death. Yet, the hysterical claim that one in seven children are developing “long COVID” appears to be completely false.

This is great news for people that care about developing policy based on facts and data. It’s not good news for those who seemingly need children to be at high risk in order to justify their nonsensical measures.





Source link

CensorTrack With TR: Big Tech Spreads FALSE ‘Horse Dewormer’ Articles

It’s Week Three of MRC’s newest video series, CensorTrack with TR. This week, we talked about Big Tech’s refusal to accept anything that goes against their approved COVID-19 narrative. 

Web Superstar Joe Rogan posted an Instagram video about how he said he healed from COVID-19 in just a few days. Most Coronavirus related content online is given a warning label. Unsurprisingly, Rogan’s video did too.

Many people have been seeking alternate methods of treatment for Covid — treatments the media and Big Tech don’t like. In Rogan’s video, he talked about Ivermectin which resulted in numerous anti-Ivermectin articles, none of which were fact checked. Rolling Stone produced one that was completely false but Big Tech still left it up and other leftist sites ran with the story despite its lies. 

Watch below for the third episode of CensorTrack with TR! We encourage you to post it and share it across all social media. If you have been censored, contact us at www.CensorTrack.org and use #FreeSpeech to point out more of Big Tech’s unacceptable bias. 

 

 

Check out our previous episodes

  • MRC Debuts Weekly Video Series Fighting Back Against Big Tech Censors
  • Big Tech SILENCES Congressman, Mourning Mother’ 
  • Big Tech RESTRICTS Past and Present Military Truths

Conservatives are under attack. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center form, contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.





Source link

Oregon Schools Abandon Quality for False Equity

(diane39/Getty Images)

Oregon becomes the latest state to abandon quality in pursuit of false equity.

As a new school year unfolds and students face yet another year of learning disruptions, policy leaders across the country should be doing everything in their power to ensure every student is equipped with an education that will help them succeed. Unfortunately, some politicians lack the conviction to enact sound policy that puts students first and, instead, have embraced a race-to-the-bottom mentality.

Rather than implement plans to turn around plummeting student achievement, create new pathways for kids to access a school tailored to their needs, or innovate with strategies to customize a child’s learning experience, Oregon governor Kate Brown quietly signed a brand new bill that hands all Oregon students a high-school diploma, irrespective of whether they can read, write, or demonstrate proficiency in math.

In other words, Oregon is lowering the bar and lowering expectations, granting students the credential of an “effective” K–12 education without making sure they’re equipped with the fundamental skills they need for a successful life.

Perhaps more concerning is the fact that Brown’s intentions are in pursuit of “education equity.” Proponents of Brown’s decision claimed Oregon’s existing standards resulted in fewer minority students graduating high school. So in Brown’s upside-down world, the solution was simple: lower the bar and increase graduation numbers.

That does zero to serve students. In effect, what Governor Brown is saying is that the school system is fine; it’s the students who are broken — namely, minority students.

Frankly put, this is asinine. It’s a backwards approach that underestimates the potential of every student, and lets the system, charged with educating the rising generation, off the hook for providing kids with the quality education they deserve.

As a former governor who used data to inform policy, I didn’t have to dig much before seeing how Oregon’s approach is deeply flawed and sets students on a dangerous path.

Oregon’s students are already underperforming. Between 2016–17 and 2018–19, all Oregon students trailed the national average in the state’s four-year high-school graduation rate. Black and white students were about 10 percent lower than the national average for their peers. Oregon’s students deserve a quality education, not artificial attempts at “education equity.”

As you peel back the onion, the sting gets worse. According to the 2019 Nation’s Report Card, more than 60 percent of Oregon fourth- and eighth-grade students are reading below grade level.

As Florida’s governor, I faced a similar challenge, but I believed then, as I do now, in the potential of every student. Instead of lowering expectations, we raised them — and demanded excellence from our educators and our schools. Back in 1998, the year I took office, Florida’s graduation rate was an appalling 52 percent, the worst in the nation, with only 42 percent of black students graduating on time. And our fourth-grade students’ reading abilities lagged behind the national average by more than a half-grade level.

After more than two decades of increased rigor, higher expectations, and steady improvement, Florida’s high-school graduation rate is now 87 percent, which is above the national average and represents a 35-point increase. Even more impressive is the performance of Florida’s black, Hispanic, economically disadvantaged students, students with limited English proficiency, and students with disabilities: They are all graduating high school at above and beyond the national average. And our fourth graders now read six points above the national average — representing a 13-point increase. This significant academic growth demonstrates that when you raise expectations, kids rise up to meet them. Just look at Florida’s Hispanic students who are today reading at nearly half a grade above their peers.

The best form of education equity is setting high expectations for all students, providing resources to help underserved students meet those higher expectations, and offering more choices and flexibility to families so they can craft the best education for their children.

Governor Brown need only to look to other parts of the country to know her approach doesn’t work. Twelve years ago, Minnesota similarly lowered expectations, and by the 2018–19 school year, graduation rates for Minnesota’s black students and economically disadvantaged high schoolers was around 10 percent lower than their peers on the national average. Despite ample evidence, Oregon isn’t alone in their backward thinking on this. California and Virginia also lowered their student expectations in pursuit of social justice, and it’s just a matter of time before more progressives follow suit and embrace this regressive, harmful approach to education.

Three decades ago, President Ronald Reagan reminded us that our country’s potential and greatness is “never more than one generation away from extinction.” Now more than ever, education is critical to the success of our children and our nation. The effort political leaders, policy leaders, administrators, educators, and parents pour into the rising generation pays off in dividends. But for every corner we cut, for every student who is shortchanged, for every student who isn’t given the education they deserve, we aren’t reaching a more “equitable” state — but rather we’re plummeting on a downward spiral.

I believe that every student can achieve their God-given potential and graduate high school with the ability to read, write, and do math. And I refuse to accept the belief that the education system — now funded at nearly $1 trillion — cannot do more to meet the needs of each and every child. Rather than taking the easy way out and simply writing kids and their futures off, Governor Brown should do the hard work to fix her state’s flawed adult-centric system that’s clearly failing its children.





Source link

Joe Manchin fires back at AOC for ‘totally false’ allegation of ‘corruption’: ‘Divide, divide, divide’

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) fired back at Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) on Sunday for “totally false” claims she made about him two weeks ago, saying the New York Democrat is interested in division, not unity.

What did AOC say?

Responding to an essay that Manchin wrote for the Wall Street Journal explaining why he opposes President Joe Biden’s $3.5 trillion spending bill, Ocasio-Cortez accused Manchin of taking his legislative cues from lobbyists.

“Manchin has weekly huddles w/ Exxon & is one of many senators who gives lobbyists their pen to write so-called ‘bipartisan’ fossil fuel bills. It’s killing people. Our people. At least 12 last night,” Ocasio-Cortez wrote on Sept. 2. “Sick of this ‘bipartisan’ corruption that masquerades as clear-eyed moderation.”

“Fossil fuel corps & dark money is destroying our democracy, country, & planet,” she added. “All day our community has been pulling bodies out of homes from the flood. Entire families. And we’re supposed to entertain lobbyist talking points about why we should abandon people & do nothing? No.”

Ocasio-Cortez, however, did not offer any evidence to substantiate her allegation.

How did Manchin respond?

Speaking on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Manchin described Ocasio-Cortez’s allegations as “totally false.”

“Absolutely not. Absolutely not,” Manchin said when asked if he “huddles” with Exxon executives. “I keep my door open for everybody. That’s totally false.”

Manchin, the Senate’s most moderate Democrat, added that Ocasio-Cortez’s rhetoric is “awful” and said she only seeks to sow division.

“Those types of superlatives, it’s just awful. Continue to divide, divide, divide,” Manchin said. “I don’t know that young lady that well. I really don’t. I have met her one time, I think, between sets here. But that’s it. So we have not had any conversations. She’s just speculating and saying things because she wants to.”

When host Dana Bash told Manchin that “there are a number of your fellow Democrats who say that you’re opposed to this because you’re bought and paid for by corporate donors,” Manchin made it clear those critics are wrong.

“I’m opposed to it because it makes no sense at all,” Manchin said.

“You’re just not entitled to create your own facts to support it. And that’s exactly what they’re doing.”

How did AOC respond?

Ocasio-Cortez did not respond to the substance of what Manchin said, but instead seized on his comment referring to her as a “young lady.”

“In Washington, I usually know my questions of power are getting somewhere when the powerful stop referring to me as ‘Congresswoman’ and start referring to me as ‘young lady’ instead,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

“Imagine if every time someone referred to someone as ‘young lady’ they were ask responded to by being addressed with their age and gender? They’d be pretty upset if one responded with ‘the old man,’ right?” she continued. “Why this kind of weird, patronizing behavior is so accepted is beyond me!”

Anything else?

Democratic lawmakers are increasingly voicing their frustration with Manchin over his refusal to support the massive spending bill, which seeks to advance many of Biden’s big-government agenda items.

Because Democrats want to pass the bill using the budget reconciliation process — in order to pass it without Republican support — they need Manchin’s support. However, if Manchin continues to hold the line, Democrats will fail in passing the bill, as the Senate is split 50-50.





Source link