Connect with us

Washington

In Washington’s streets, a new popular consensus on Palestine

Published

on

In Washington’s streets, a new popular consensus on Palestine


I took an early train into Washington, D.C. on July 24. As I stepped out of Union Station, I found myself in the company of hundreds of police officers, armed men with heavy brows and assault rifles. Around me, protesters with Palestinian flags and keffiyehs oriented themselves in the heat, all arriving from out of town.

The presence of the police — some of whom were bussed in from New York, 240 miles to the north — was for the benefit of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who was set to speak to Congress that day. The capital pulsed with the threat of violence.

I walked southwest to Pennsylvania Avenue toward the National Gallery of Art, where demonstrators had begun to gather. Several large tour buses had pulled in, each carrying more protesters. A large stage had been erected at one intersection and people walked around as speakers remonstrated from the podium.

Heavily-armed police seen during the pro-Palestinian protests in Washington, July 24, 2024. (Arie Leib Abrams/Flash90)

Advertisement

Many wore red t-shirts, representing the “red line” that President Joe Biden claimed to have set for Netanyahu and the Israeli army in Rafah, the southernmost city in the Gaza Strip. At various points the crowd erupted in chants: “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” and “Netanyahu, you can’t hide — we charge you with genocide.”

The previous day had seen seven major U.S. labor unions call for an end to the war on Gaza, which many experts now agree constitutes a genocide. The unions represent seven million Americans and are stalwarts of Democratic Party politics, with critical mobilizing power ahead of the November elections.  They issued a public letter to Biden insisting that “immediately cutting U.S. military aid to the Israeli government is necessary to bring about a peaceful resolution to this conflict.”

That same day, Jewish Voice for Peace, an anti-Zionist organization, staged a mass protest in the rotunda of the Cannon House Office Building, where many Congressional representatives maintain their offices. The protesters there also wore red shirts, many of them proclaiming, “Not in my Name.”

Pro-Palestinian protesters in Washington demonstrate against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his speech to the U.S. Congress, July 24, 2024. (Kerem Gencer)

Pro-Palestinian protesters in Washington demonstrate against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his speech to the U.S. Congress, July 24, 2024. (Kerem Gencer)

These coordinated mobilizations represent a stark break from the logic that underpins the Democratic Party’s support for Israel. The various groups that comprise the Shut It Down coalition, which organized the demonstration in Washington, have never aligned with the Israel lobby that the Democrats, like the Republicans, have embraced for decades. In fact, the coalition’s success in turning out huge numbers of people on the streets magnifies the perception that the grip of the lobby, and its ability to marginalize dissenting voices, is breaking. 

Advertisement

Brandon Mancilla, Regional Director and member of the United Auto Workers’ International Executive Board, said to me, “The fate of our country is in the balance and voters have made it very clear that a majority of Americans support an end to the war,” noting that 83 percent of Democrats back a ceasefire.

“We’re here also because we have great concern for the future and workers rights in our country and that’s intimately tied to the fate of the Palestinian people and the continuation of this war,” he said. “If we’re serious about protecting democracy and the labor movement, we can’t have the return of Donald Trump. In order to do that, we need to have a different course on Gaza.”

Pro-Palestinian protesters in Washington demonstrate against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his speech to the U.S. Congress, July 24, 2024. (Arie Leib Abrams/Flash90)

Pro-Palestinian protesters in Washington demonstrate against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his speech to the U.S. Congress, July 24, 2024. (Arie Leib Abrams/Flash90)

Israel’s Guardian

The Democratic Party has been slow to acknowledge the chasm between the views of the overwhelming majority of its base and its leadership’s unwavering support for an apartheid state. But change is in the air.

Many took note in March, for example, when Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer explicitly called for a new government in Israel on the Senate floor. For liberal Zionists like Schumer, the genocide in Gaza is a source of alarm primarily because of its impact on Israel’s international reputation — but that has not undermined his commitment to the Israeli state project.

Advertisement

Schumer once described himself in the following way: “My name … comes from the [Hebrew] word ‘shomer,’ which means ‘guardian.’ My ancestors were guardians of the ghetto wall in Chortkov and I believe [God], actually, gave [my] name as one of my roles that is very important in the United States Senate, to be a shomer for Israel, and I will continue to be that with every bone in my body.”

Senator Chuck Schumer speaks to the 2018 AIPAC Policy Conference in Washington DC, March 5, 2018. (Courtesy of AIPAC)

Senator Chuck Schumer speaks to the 2018 AIPAC Policy Conference in Washington DC, March 5, 2018. (Courtesy of AIPAC)

Memorably, he also sought to undermine the Barack Obama administration’s efforts to engineer a nuclear deal with Iran. Schumer’s break with Netanyahu was thus consistent with his longstanding efforts to put Israel first — ahead of any single Israeli leader, and even ahead of his own party and president.

The Senate majority leader’s denunciation was notable for another reason: it was further evidence that the “bipartisan consensus” on Israel —  the hegemonic view among American politicians that Israel is democratic, enlightened, strategically vital, and not an apartheid state — was breaking.

Netanyahu’s speech to Congress was, in part, a result of these developments in American domestic politics. Mike Johnson, the Republican speaker of the house, sought to exploit the apparent breach in the bipartisan consensus by inviting the prime minister, a widely acknowledged war criminal, to speak. Yet perhaps to Johnson’s surprise, the invitation was supported by both Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic leader in the House.

Advertisement

Johnson may have mistaken mild disagreements between liberal Zionists like Schumer and Netanyahu, for actual disagreements on substance. While Schumer and Netanyahu may diverge on whether road signs in Israel should carry both Hebrew and Arabic lettering, they do not fundamentally disagree that Israel must remain a “Jewish state” by working zealously to secure and maintain superior rights for Jewish citizens.

Pro-Palestinian protesters in Washington demonstrate against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his speech to the U.S. Congress, July 24, 2024. (Arie Leib Abrams/Flash90)

Pro-Palestinian protesters in Washington demonstrate against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his speech to the U.S. Congress, July 24, 2024. (Arie Leib Abrams/Flash90)

Nor do they disagree on America’s essential commitment to protecting Israel in every forum. Schumer explained his support for Netanyahu’s invitation by saying that “America’s relationship with Israel is ironclad and transcends one person or prime minister.” In a sense, they represent the poles on the narrow spectrum of opinion among members of the Israel lobby, represented institutionally by center-right JStreet and far right AIPAC in America.

Jeffries’ support, meanwhile, likely springs in great part from the fact that he cannot afford to alienate the Israel lobby; he undoubtedly took note of AIPAC’s success in unseating Jamaal Bowman, a congressman Jeffries personally endorsed.

Smash-mouth politics

Jeffries is in many ways a lagging indicator of the Israel lobby’s power in America. But there is reason to believe an opening is developing, one that may herald generational change.

Advertisement

Schumer, Biden, and other politicians of their generation represent the tail end of a vanguard in Washington. Today, there appears to be less uncritical support for Israel among elected public officials and their voters. Among Democrats, there is growing outrage at AIPAC’s funneling of money to Republicans in competitive primaries, which is driving the perception that the organization is fundamentally a Republican organ. More than 100 Democrats — half of the party’s representation in Congress — boycotted Netanyahu’s speech, compared to 50 abstentions in 2015, when he last issued a bipartisan address.

Pro-Palestinian protesters in Washington demonstrate against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his speech to the U.S. Congress, July 24, 2024. (Arie Leib Abrams/Flash90)

Pro-Palestinian protesters in Washington demonstrate against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his speech to the U.S. Congress, July 24, 2024. (Arie Leib Abrams/Flash90)

As Chris Habiby, the National Government Affairs and Advocacy Director for the Arab American Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) said to me on Wednesday in Washington, “We’re putting together a comprehensive list of who attended and who didn’t to identify allies.” The goal, he said, is “to identify and expand our coalition of allies,” including people who may support an embargo on U.S. arms shipments to the Israeli army, and to “empower Arab American [and other] voters to organize and use their voices to have a real impact on elections,” and consequently, on policy.

Amid the genocide in Gaza, the fragmentation of the Israel lobby’s power has only accelerated. The campus protests which spread across the United States this past spring highlight a generational change which may lead, in time, to a bottom-up change in policy. As Stephen Walt, co-author of The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy, said to me, “Israel has lost the war for uncritical acceptance, especially among people under 40. The battle for the moral high ground has been lost. What’s left is power politics — the naked political power of groups like AIPAC.”

The “smash-mouth politics” which was showcased with Netanyahu’s appearance in Washington is also drawing the ire of some on the American right, too. Thomas Massie, a Republican in the House of Representatives, spoke openly and derisively with the conservative media commentator Tucker Carlson about the “AIPAC babysitters” who attend his fellow Republicans.

Advertisement
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks at the AIPAC Conference in Washington, D.C. on March 6, 2018 (Haim Zach/GPO)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks at the AIPAC Conference in Washington, D.C. on March 6, 2018 (Haim Zach/GPO)

But it is on the left that the change is most visible. Columns in The New Republic and the New York Times have voiced opposition to Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro as Kamala Harris’s possible vice presidential pick, primarily because of his record comparing anti-war students for Palestine to the Ku Klux Klan. As one opinion writer at the New York Times put it bluntly, “by not putting Shapiro on the ticket, Harris avoids splits in the party over the war in Gaza.”

‘This is where the people are’

By noon of July 24, the protesters in Washington had succeeded in shutting down six intersections in the capital. They soon began marching toward the Capitol building, where the police used pepper spray against them. I had ducked into a nearby building to watch a livestream of Netanyahu’s speech, which ran alongside clips from the march: a policewoman wielding a baton, and a protester burning an effigy of Netanyahu.

Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein addresses protesters in Washington, July 24, 2024. (Kerem Gencer)

Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein addresses protesters in Washington, July 24, 2024. (Kerem Gencer)

Before I left Washington, however, I spoke with Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate for President. I asked her why she was participating in the demonstration. “I’m here because the genocide has to stop,” she said. “This is where the power is. This is where the people are.”

Advertisement

“I’m also here because I’m a Jew,” she added. “I was raised just after the Holocaust, in a Jewish community, attending a Jewish synagogue where we were coming to terms with a genocide. And coming to terms with a genocide had everything to do with not allowing it to ever happen again.”

Her views were strongly resonant all around me. Many of the young people who are turned off by the Democratic establishment have witnessed the Gaza genocide in real time on their phones or computer screens. They watched videos of Palestinian children beheaded by Israeli bombs, or of far-right Israelis rioting in support of alleged rapists in the army, and they understandably recoil.

And while they may not be able to stop the destruction of Palestinians in Gaza today, they are tomorrow’s voters. And horror is not easily forgotten.





Source link

Advertisement

Washington

Washington Lands QB From Stanford

Published

on

Washington Lands QB From Stanford


On Monday, On3 Sports insider, Hayes Fawcett, was first to report that former Stanford quarterback Elijah Brown transferred to Washington, officially ending his tenure on The Farm. This comes nearly two weeks after Brown entered the transfer portal, and he will head to Seattle with three years of eligibility remaining.

Brown will presumably to be the backup to Demond Williams at Washington. Williams, who signed a $4 million deal to play for the Huskies at the end of the season, initially entered the transfer portal himself on Jan. 8.

But after backlash and threatened legal action by the university, he ultimately decided to stay with the program for the ’26 season. As a result, Brown will likely use this season to continue to develop and compete for the starting job in 2027 after Williams’ presumed departure for the NFL.

Advertisement

A former four-star recruit, Brown started for parts of two seasons at Stanford, playing in three games with one start as a true freshman, which was limited due to an early season injury.

Advertisement

As a redshirt freshman in 2025, Brown played in six games with three starts, finishing the season with 829 pass yards, four touchdowns and two interceptions. His best game of the season came against North Carolina on Nov. 8, where he threw for 284 yards, one touchdown and one interception in a 20-15 loss.

A star at Mater Dei High School in Santa Ana, California, Brown started all four of his years at the school and became only the fourth player in school history to earn the starting quarterback job as a freshman.

In his sophomore season, after throwing for 2,581 yards and 30 touchdowns, Brown led Mater Dei to a perfect 12-0 record and the CIF Open Division Title. As a junior, Brown once again shined for Mater Dei, throwing for 2,785 yards, 31 touchdowns and four interceptions as the program went 12-1.

After another dominant season that saw Brown throw for over 2,900 yards and nearly 40 touchdowns while winning another state title, he committed to Stanford over offers from several other big name schools including Alabama, UCLA, Arizona, Georgia and Michigan. After signing with the Cardinal, he became the highest rated quarterback to commit to the school since Tanner McKee in 2018.

Advertisement

But Brown’s college career has been far from what was expected. After a promising college debut against Cal Poly in his true freshman season, Brown injured his hand and missed basically the whole season, playing in only two other games where he struggled.

Advertisement

In 2025, Brown lost the starting job in training camp to Ben Gulbranson and even after replacing Gulbranson late in the season, he never was able to get Stanford’s offense to that next level. When he found success, it was typically late in games once the outcome was more or less decided.

New head coach Tavita Pritchard has a strong reputation for developing quarterbacks which could have benefitted Brown, but after Stanford signed Davis Warren from Michigan, in addition to bringing in new recruits such as Michael Mitchell Jr., the QB room got too crowded for Brown.

Now, Brown will be coached by another elite offensive mind in Jedd Fisch, a coach he hopes will bring out the best in him and have him playing like the four-star recruit he came into college as.

Recommended Articles:



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Washington

Our reporting showed Washington ranks last in green energy growth. Now the state is working to speed it up

Published

on

Our reporting showed Washington ranks last in green energy growth. Now the state is working to speed it up


FILE – In this Feb. 10, 2010, file photo, power lines from Bonneville Dam head in all directions in North Bonneville, Wash. (AP Photo/Don Ryan)

Don Ryan / AP

This article was produced for ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network in partnership with Oregon Public Broadcasting. Sign up for First Look to get OPB stories in your inbox six days a week.

Washington state has launched a sweeping effort to speed up construction of renewable energy projects, prompted by reporting from Oregon Public Broadcasting and ProPublica that chronicled how the state came to rank dead last in the nation for renewable energy growth.

Advertisement

Washington’s Department of Commerce, which works on state energy policy, has offered up state employees to help the federal Bonneville Power Administration process its backlog of renewable energy projects — though it remains uncertain whether the agency will accept the offer.

Bonneville, which owns 75% of the Northwest’s power grid, must sign off before wind and solar developers who wish to connect to its grid can break ground.

Meanwhile, four state agencies have recommended that Washington’s Legislature provide incentives for utilities to upgrade transmission lines, plan “microgrid” energy projects that don’t need to connect to Bonneville’s power lines, and create a new state agency to plan and potentially pay for major new transmission corridors. A bill to create such an authority had a hearing on Jan 21.

The Commerce Department, the Department of Ecology, the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, and the Utilities and Transportation Commission are also meeting regularly to diagnose what’s holding up more than a dozen high-priority wind, solar, and energy storage projects that could make an outsized difference.

Joe Nguyễn, who recently stepped down as the state’s commerce director, said there’s added urgency to get the work done since OPB and ProPublica last year showed that other states like Iowa and Texas have made far more progress than Washington.

Advertisement

“We’re forcing these tough conversations that have never been done before,” Nguyễn, a former state senator who helped pass Washington’s law setting a deadline to go carbon-free, said during a recent public forum. He spoke at the panel just before leaving the state Commerce Department in January to take a job as head of the Seattle Chamber of Commerce.

“We probably have to modify some policies, we’re going to amend some things, we have to make strategic investments, but I think that’s a good thing,” Nguyễn said at the forum. “I’m not daunted by the task.”

Under Bonneville, projects face longer odds of successfully connecting to the electrical grid than anywhere else in the country, OPB and ProPublica found.

The federal agency weighs how many new transmission lines and substations will be needed to carry the added load, and it has historically been slow to pay for such upgrades, renewable energy advocates have said. Often, the burden falls on the builders of the wind and solar projects.

Washington and Oregon lawmakers failed to account for this obstacle when they required electric utilities to phase out fossil fuels. Combined with rapid growth in electricity demand from new data centers powering artificial intelligence, studies now predict rolling blackouts in the Pacific Northwest within the next five years.

Advertisement

Inspired by OPB and ProPublica’s reporting, the Seattle nonprofit Clean & Prosperous published a report this month identifying energy high-potential projects that could generate enough power for 7 million homes and contribute $195 billion to the state’s economy if built by 2030. Kevin Tempest, research director for Clean & Prosperous, said the fact that Washington ranked 50th nationally for green power growth was poorly understood until the recent news coverage.

“I don’t think that we were aware of just how stark it was,” said Tempest, whose group advocates for “entrepreneurial approaches” to eliminating fossil fuels and promoting economic growth. “So that really opened our eyes and, I think, accelerated a lot of conversations.”

Separately, in Oregon, Gov. Tina Kotek recently signed two executive orders intended to speed up the construction of energy projects. Kotek, too, said the news reports helped galvanize policymakers.

Nguyễn told OPB and ProPublica their reporting made him realize “the people who talk about clean energy are not actually doing it.” But now, he said, “Washington state’s desperately trying.”

‘Things that we can control’

Most of the high-priority projects identified by the state and by Clean & Prosperous are waiting for approval to connect to Bonneville’s substations and transmission lines so that developers move toward construction.

Advertisement

The federal agency’s review process historically has been sluggish and often puts the onus on a single energy developer to invest tens of millions of dollars in upgrades or else wait until another developer comes along to shoulder some of the cost. In addition, state officials in Oregon and Washington must also sign off on the location planned for new power lines and wind or solar farms — a process with its own bottlenecks.

“There are a myriad of reasons why projects are not happening,” Tempest said. “It’s different for each case.”

But he said across all projects, Bonneville is “a common feature for some of the new facilities not breaking ground.”

Bonneville spokesperson Kevin Wingert said in an email that the agency has implemented several reforms over the past year to enable faster connections to its grid. For example, the agency began studying clusters of projects collectively, based on their readiness, and expects its first study to be done at the end of the month.

Wingert said the agency has identified 7 gigawatts worth of projects — roughly the capacity of Grand Coulee hydroelectric dam, Washington’s largest power plant — that it says it’s on pace to have online within five years. It expects to have more than double that amount connected and energized by 2035.

Advertisement

In the near term, the state is focusing on grid improvements to the transmission system it can make without Bonneville, according to Casey Sixkiller, director of the Washington Department of Ecology.

He said Washington will work to help projects connect to some part of the roughly 25% of the region’s grid that is operated by investor-owned and public utilities.

“I think the point is for us in Washington, trying to find, as we wait for BPA, who’s years behind, what are the other things that we can control that we should be prioritizing and trying to move forward?” Sixkiller said.

Kurt Beckett, chair of Washington’s Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, which issues site permits for energy projects, said localized improvements that can be made outside of Bonneville’s grid are cheaper and will have tangible, immediate results. They also have the benefit of “buying time for the bigger, harder upgrades that Bonneville’s in charge of.”

Bonneville says it plans to spend $5 billion on nearly two dozen transmission lines and substation improvements, but many of those projects are years away with no firm deadline.

Advertisement

What’s within Washington’s control in the near term is to streamline state permitting of projects that have received or don’t need Bonneville’s approval.

The need was highlighted by the passage last year of President Donald Trump’s so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which will phase out key federal energy tax credits and set a July 4 deadline for projects to break ground. The credits cover as much as 50% of construction costs for most solar and wind farms.

More than 200 wind, solar and battery storage projects theoretically could meet the deadline “should development processes improve,” Clean & Prosperous concluded in its report. The group said it was a reference to both Bonneville’s role and the state’s.

Sixkiller said Washington leaders are prioritizing a smaller list of 19 proposed projects they think have the best chance of beating the July deadline. In some cases, the developers already have a connection agreement with Bonneville in place. In two, the projects will connect to power lines run by a utility.

An offer of help

In addition to actions taken by state agencies, Washington lawmakers are considering a bill that would ease the state’s reliance on Bonneville to build new power lines. That would come in the form of a state transmission authority — a new state agency in charge of planning transmission routes, acquiring land and working with developers to build new lines.

Advertisement

It could also eventually pay for projects. Washington lawmakers are calling for a report on what financing tools, such as the ability to issue bonds, the new transmission authority will need.

The bill has support from environmental groups, labor unions and energy developers. However, lobbyists for large industrial energy consumers and for Bonneville’s public utility customers opposed the bill, saying they supported the intention to build more transmission but wanted the state to focus on relaxing its permitting requirements to let utilities solve the problem.

For the time being, state officials told OPB and ProPublica they are working to shore up Bonneville’s ability to do the work that the region’s grid needs.

Beckett said he hopes the state can help Bonneville with the agency’s self-imposed goal of cutting the average time a project spends in the queue from 15 years down to five or six.

Agencies have offered Bonneville some of their staff to help its analysts complete grid connection studies, which Washington officials said makes sense because the state, in many cases, is already reviewing the same projects that are awaiting the federal agency’s permission to connect.

Advertisement

Bonneville hasn’t said yes yet. Wingert said Bonneville’s interconnection studies have “numerous technical and regulatory requirements” that make them “inappropriate or infeasible” for the state to conduct on BPA’s behalf.

But, he said, the agency was open to working with the state to speed projects up at some point.

“There may be opportunities to coordinate efficiencies between state policies and BPA’s interconnection processes in the future,” Wingert said.

Nguyễn said that technical requirements shouldn’t keep Bonneville from accepting the state’s help in vetting projects or analyzing their impact on the grid, and that state employees could help with the less technical aspects of the report if needed.

“If you want us to bring you lunch so your analysts can go faster, we will do it,” he said. “That’s the level of seriousness I have about getting transmission built.”

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Washington

Southwest Washington’s Gluesenkamp Perez calls for Noem to step down

Published

on

Southwest Washington’s Gluesenkamp Perez calls for Noem to step down


U.S. Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Southwest Washington, on Saturday called for Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to step down following the shooting death of a man in Minneapolis by a federal agent.

“It’s unacceptable to have another needless death in Minnesota, and it’s unacceptable to have elected officials, candidates, and administration officials continue to throw gas on this fire, or tacitly encourage assaults on law enforcement and anyone else,” Gluesenkamp Perez said. “The situation is un-American and Secretary Noem needs to step down.”

A Border Patrol agent shot and killed 37-year-old Alex Pretti, a protester in Minneapolis, on Saturday.

Gluesenkamp Perez’s call that Noem step down came after Gluesenkamp Perez voted to fund DHS on Thursday amid concerns from other Democrats that the legislation did not limit President Donald Trump’s mass deportation efforts.

Advertisement

“When fishermen in Pacific County get in trouble out on the water, the Coast Guard makes sure they’re safe. When there’s flooding or landslides in Southwest Washington, FEMA helps our families get back on their feet. The Department of Homeland Security is extremely important to my community. I could not in good conscience vote to shut it down,” Gluesenkamp Perez said in a statement on Thursday.

Meanwhile, on Sunday, Democratic Sen. Jacky Rosen called for the impeachment of Noem, saying that she believes Noem is attempting to “mislead the American public” about the fatal shooting of Pretti.

The call from Rosen, a moderate who was part of the group that helped Republicans end the 43-day government shutdown last year, comes amid a growing fury from congressional Democrats who have also vowed to block funding for the Homeland Security Department. A House resolution to launch impeachment proceedings against Noem has the support of more than 100 Democrats, but few Senate Democrats have so far weighed in. Oregon Democratic U.S. Reps. Maxine Dexter and Suzanne Bonamici also support impeaching Noem.

“Kristi Noem has been an abject failure leading the Department of Homeland Security for the last year — and the abuses of power we’re seeing from ICE are the latest proof that she has lost control over her own department and staff,” Rosen said in a statement to The Associated Press.

Rosen said Noem’s conduct is “deeply shameful” and she “must be impeached and removed from office immediately.”

Advertisement

Impeachment proceedings are unlikely in the GOP-controlled Congress, but mounting Democratic outrage over the violence in the streets of Minneapolis is certain to disrupt Senate Republican leaders’ hopes this week to quickly approve a wide-ranging spending bill and avoid a partial government shutdown on Jan. 30.

And while some moderate Democrats have been wary over the last year of criticizing the Trump administration on border and immigration issues, the fatal shootings in Minneapolis of Pretti on Saturday and Renee Good on Jan. 7 have transformed the debate, even among moderates like Rosen.

Noem defends fatal shooting

The Nevada senator’s call for impeachment followed Noem’s quick defense, without a full investigation, of the fatal shooting of Pretti by a Border Patrol agent. Videos of the scene reviewed by The Associated Press appear to contradict statements by the Trump administration that the shots were fired “defensively” against Pretti as he “approached” them with a gun. Pretti was licensed to carry a concealed weapon, but he appears to be seen with only a phone in his hand in the videos.

During the scuffle, agents discovered that he was carrying a 9 mm semiautomatic handgun and opened fire with several shots, including into his back. Officials did not say if Pretti brandished the weapon.

Noem said Pretti showed up to “impede a law enforcement operation.”

Advertisement

“This looks like a situation where an individual arrived at the scene to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement,” Noem said Sunday.

In her call for Noem’s impeachment, Rosen cited other issues beyond the current ICE operations. She said Noem has also “violated the public trust by wasting millions in taxpayer dollars” on self-promotion and cited reports that the Coast Guard purchased her two luxury jets worth $172 million.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending