 |
| CNN News |
"Four years after inciting a mob to attack the United States Capitol, President Trump returned to these historic halls to continue his mission: sow chaos and enrich himself and his billionaire friends," Scott (D-VA), a ranking member of the Committee on Education and Workforce, declared in a statement.
Scott's sharp critique came on the heels of Trump's address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday night. The congressman brought with him one of his constituents, retired Army Staff Sergeant Alexzandria Hunt, as his guest, highlighting the impact of the Trump administration's policies on the federal workforce. Scott revealed that Hunt, a former supply technician at the Hampton Veterans Affairs Medical Center, was fired "without notice or cause" as part of the Trump administration's sweeping cuts to the federal workforce.
"Over the course of six weeks, President Trump has empowered Elon Musk - an unelected billionaire - to take a chainsaw to the core functions of the federal government, leaving thousands of civil service workers jobless," Scott asserted. He went on to state that Hunt and thousands of veterans and other civil servants "have had their lives upended" due to Trump and Musk's "cruel policies."
Scott's statement also condemned Trump's foreign policy, accusing him of undermining national security and the country's standing on the world stage. "President Trump has also weakened our national security and our standing on the world stage by abandoning Ukraine, doing the bidding of Vladimir Putin," he added.
The congressman's statement echoed the sentiments of many Democrats who were vocal in their disapproval of Trump's address. During the speech, Democrats held up signs with messages like "No King!", "Save Medicaid," and "This Is NOT Normal," while several others staged a walkout, including Reps. Lateefah Simon (Calif.), Jasmine Crockett (Texas), Maxwell Frost (Fla.), Melanie Stansbury (NM), and LaMonica McIver (NJ).
Congressman Al Green of Texas, who waved his cane at Trump and repeatedly shouted, "You have no mandate," was ordered removed after refusing to sit down. "The president was saying he had a mandate, and I was making it clear that he has no mandate to cut Medicaid," Green explained to reporters. "It's worth it to let people know that there are some of us who are going to stand up against this president's desire to cut Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security."
Scott's statement, delivered with a clear and powerful voice, underscores the growing tension between Democrats and Republicans, particularly in the wake of Trump's return to the political stage. The congressman's focus on the impact of Trump's policies on the federal workforce and his criticism of the president's foreign policy highlight the deep divisions that continue to shape the political landscape.
Trump's FBI Pick Vows to "Streamline" Agency, Highlight "Missteps" in Senate Confirmation Hearing
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Kash Patel, President Donald Trump's controversial choice to lead the FBI, is poised to launch a full-scale critique of the agency's past actions and call for a renewed focus on combating violent crime during his Senate confirmation hearing tomorrow. According to his opening remarks, which were adapted into a commentary piece for The Wall Street Journal Wednesday, Patel plans to use the hearing as a platform to highlight what he perceives as "missteps" by the FBI and to lay out his vision for the agency's future.
Patel, a staunch Trump ally who served as a senior advisor in the Trump administration, has been a vocal critic of the FBI in recent months, both in his memoir and in podcast interviews. His expected remarks before the Senate Judiciary Committee are likely to continue this trend, with Patel highlighting what he sees as an "erosion of trust" in the FBI and past instances of warrant abuse.
"I spearheaded the investigation which proved the violations of FISA - a tool I had previously used to hunt down terrorists - unlawfully used to spy on political opponents," Patel plans to tell the committee, referencing his role in the House Intelligence Committee's work to investigate the FBI's 2016 probe into the Trump campaign and the bureau's use of FISA warrants. "Such misconduct is unacceptable and undermines public trust," he is expected to add.
Patel's criticism of the FBI's intelligence activities is not new. He has previously suggested the agency should scale back its intelligence operations and, in his opening remarks, he is set to reiterate his belief that the FBI should focus on "letting good cops be cops."
"Violent crime is destroying families across the nation, we cannot afford to have a lack of trust in the very institution mandated to protect them," Patel plans to say. "Rebuilding that trust is vital to ensuring the FBI can carry out its mission effectively."
While Patel has previously advocated for the FBI's headquarters in Washington, D.C., to be transformed into a "museum of the deep state," he appears to be taking a more tempered approach in his statement to the committee. He plans to tell senators that he will "focus on streamlining operations at headquarters while bolstering the presence of field agents across the nation."
Patel's emphasis on transparency and congressional oversight echoes the approach taken by other Trump nominees to lead federal agencies. "Members of Congress have hundreds of unanswered requests to the FBI. If confirmed, I will be a strong advocate for Congressional oversight, ensuring that the FBI operates with the openness necessary to rebuild trust by simply replying to you," he plans to tell senators.
Patel's confirmation hearing is expected to be a contentious one, with Democrats likely to raise concerns about his past criticisms of the FBI and his close ties to Trump. They are also likely to question his qualifications to lead the agency, given his lack of experience as a law enforcement officer.
Ukraine Seeks Concrete Security Guarantees from US and Europe, But Will Anyone Step Up?
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The question of Ukraine's future security hangs heavy in the air as the war with Russia drags on. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, in a series of high-stakes meetings with US and European leaders, has repeatedly demanded concrete security guarantees, a plea that has been met with a mix of tepid responses and outright dismissal.
Zelensky, in a tense exchange with US President Donald Trump and Vice-President JD Vance at the White House last week, has been adamant in his demand for concrete commitments. "How can Ukraine be assured that Russian President Vladimir Putin would abide by any ceasefire deal – and not resume fighting in a year or two?" Zelensky asks. "And how can Ukraine be protected from the unyielding ambitions of its more powerful neighbor?"
Trump, known for his unpredictable and often controversial statements, has been dismissive of Zelensky's concerns. "Security is so easy, that's about 2% of the problem," he stated during a heated Oval Office meeting on Friday.
Trump's answers to the wider issue of Ukrainian security have been vague, beyond claiming that the Europeans will handle it and that there will be no need for a US backstop. "It should not be that hard a deal to make," Trump said on Monday, hours before he announced a pause in shipments of US military aid to Ukraine. He also suggested that the presence of American companies exploiting Ukraine's rare-earths and other minerals would be enough to deter Russia. "I don't think anybody's going to play around if we're there with a lot of workers," he said.
This statement, however, is met with skepticism by many experts, who point to the fact that numerous US companies were operating in Ukraine on the day before Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in a Fox News interview last week, offered a more nuanced perspective. "What Ukraine really needs is a deterrent... to make it costly for anyone to come after them again in the future," he said. He added that "this doesn't have to just be America. I mean, the Europeans can be involved in that."
However, other US officials have signaled that the US is not willing to play a significant role in providing such a deterrent. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated that European troops in Ukraine would not enjoy protection under NATO's principle of collective security. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz echoed this sentiment, claiming that the matter of security guarantees is "squarely going to be with the Europeans."
A Complex and Uncertain Future:
The lack of concrete security guarantees from the US and Europe leaves Ukraine in a precarious position. While the US has provided significant military aid to Ukraine, the absence of a long-term commitment to its security leaves the country vulnerable to future Russian aggression.
The European Union, while offering support and humanitarian aid, has been reluctant to commit to a robust security guarantee. Many European countries are wary of escalating the conflict with Russia and are hesitant to take on a significant military role in Ukraine.
The Stakes are High:
The outcome of this debate has far-reaching implications for the future of Ukraine and the broader security landscape in Europe. If Ukraine is left without concrete security guarantees, it could embolden Russia to escalate its aggression and further destabilize the region.
The situation also raises questions about the effectiveness of NATO and the US's commitment to its allies. If the US is unwilling to provide security guarantees to Ukraine, it could undermine confidence in the alliance and its ability to deter aggression.
Tags
News