#sen. James Lankford

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Republican U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton led a group of fellow GOP senators Wednesday in denouncing pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses.

WHY IT MATTERS: Republican congressional campaign arms are already cutting footage and are ready to launch ads slamming vulnerable Democrats for not condemning the campus protests that have erupted over Israel's war in Gaza.

The escalating tension in recent days has put a spotlight on one of the most sensitive and divisive issues within the Democratic Party.

WHAT THEY'RE SAYING: "These little Gazas are disgusting cesspools of antisemitic hate full of pro-Hamas sympathizers, fanatics and freaks," Cotton said in a press conference Wednesday.

"Every university and every student has the right to be able to speak their mind to be able to test out new ideas," said Oklahoma U.S. Sen. James Lankford, also a Republican.

• "But when you're talking about screaming at Jewish students, and rabbis [are] saying no longer is this university a safe place for you to be, it violates the very principles that all these universities supposedly stand for."

REALITY CHECK: No encampments or sit-ins have been reported at Arkansas or Oklahoma college campuses.

FLASHBACK: Cotton took to X last week, encouraging "people who get stuck behind the pro-Hamas mobs blocking traffic: take matters into your own hands."

• The post was later edited, adding "to get them out of the way" to the sentence.

WHAT WE'RE WATCHING: The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday passed the Antisemitism Awareness Act. The bill, which now goes to the Senate, would require the Department of Education to use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition of antisemitism in its enforcement of anti-discrimination laws.

• "That's a bill we should promptly bring to the floor and pass over here, as well," Cotton said.

[darkmaga-retard]

According to Axios, which calls it the “latest example of Harris flip-flopping on her past liberal positions,” Harris is now embracing a ‘more hawkish’ immigration policy while the Trump campaign spends tens of millions of dollars on attack ads over the Biden-Harris administration’s failed border policies.

Last week, Harris told the Democratic National Convention that she would sign a recent bipartisan border security bill negotiated by Sens. James Lankford (R-OK) and Chris Murphy (D-CT), which calls for hundreds of millions of dollars of unspent funds to be used to continue Trump’s wall.

“It requires the Trump border wall,” Lankford told Axios. “It is in the bill itself that it sets the standards that were set during the Trump administration: Here’s where it will be built. Here’s how it has to be built, the height, the type, everything during the Trump construction.”

In 2017, then-Senator Harris called Trump’s border wall project a “stupid use of money,” and committed to blocking funding for it.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Monica Alba and Julie Tsirkin at NBC News:

The Biden administration is expected to propose a rule Thursday that would accelerate the pace at which certain migrants could be processed and denied asylum after having crossing the southern border, according to two sources familiar with the decision. The regulation, which had been in the works for months and will be published by the Department of Homeland Security, seeks to cut down on illegal border crossings. It would specifically target people who are deemed ineligible for asylum because of criminal records or who are assessed to be national security risks, one of the sources said.  The asylum process sometimes can take years, and the proposed rule will aim to shorten that time substantially for those deemed ineligible. It is not considered the major executive action NBC News has been previewing for months, which could still materialize in the near term. The White House declined to comment.

As the Biden administration weighs more sweeping executive action on the border that could affect the asylum process, up Pennsylvania Avenue, Senate Democrats had an initial closed-door conversation Wednesday about what legislative steps they could take. “I think the starting point for the discussion is the bipartisan deal that was negotiated, so we’ll start there. Do we subtract a little bit, do we add a little bit? We don’t know yet,” Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., told NBC News after the meeting. “Everybody realizes we are going to have a meaningful discussion about it in the coming weeks.” NBC News reported Monday that Democrats in the Senate could force “messaging” votes on immigration and border-related provisions that Republicans would most likely block. Republicans blocked the bipartisan package negotiated by Sens. James Lankford, R-Okla., Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and Kyrsten Sinema, I-Ariz., in February at the behest of former President Donald Trump. 

But asked about the administration’s actions during his leadership news conference Wednesday, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said the Biden administration and congressional Democrats “agree” that “the best thing to deal with the problem on the border is pass legislation.” “We have strong bipartisan drafted legislation,” Schumer said. “If Republicans are serious about fixing the border, join us — we can only pass it with Republican votes, Democratic votes and Republican votes, and that’s what we should do.”

The Biden Administration is expected to propose a new rule to speed up the processing of asylum seekers of those barred from seeking asylum.

[mariacallous]

(JTA) — A Las Vegas man threatened to kill Sen. Jacky Rosen, the Nevada Jewish Democrat, federal officials said, lacing his threats with antisemitic invective and anger at her advocacy for Israel while it is at war with Hamas.

Between Oct. 11 and Oct. 19, John Anthony Miller, 44, left numerous threatening messages on the office phone of a Nevada U.S. senator, the Nevada U.S. attorney said in a statement Monday announcing Miller’s arrest. On Oct. 17,  “he threatened to assault, kidnap, or murder” her “with intent to impede, intimidate, or interfere” with her official duties, the statement said. The following day, he tried to enter a federal building where she keeps an office.

The statement and court papers filed Friday, when Miller appeared in court, do not name the senator, but Rosen’s office confirmed to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that she was the target.

In one of the Oct. 17 voicemails, Miller allegedly said, “You done picked your side, bitch, and you done chose evil. I don’t give a f— if you were born into it or not, bitch, you are f—ing evil, bitch, and we are going to exterminate you.”

In an Oct. 19 call, the caller lashed out at Rosen’s Jewish heritage and her Israel advocacy, according to the charges. He believed Rosen was going to advocate for American Israelis, whom he believes number 450,000, to return to the United States to commit war crimes.

“I’m pretty sure she would not make it illegal for these savage Israeli settlers to come back, and 450,000 of them are American and are able to commit war crimes and come back and forth, back and forth,” the caller said. “She lets her own family members kill these Palestinians in the West Bank.”

On Oct. 18, the charges allege, Miller attempted to enter Lloyd D. George Courthouse, where Rosen has an office. He was denied entry and allegedly walked down Las Vegas Boulevard shouting profanities, including “to kill every Israeli terror-f—ing-rist.”

Rosen, a former synagogue president, has been at the forefront of combating antisemitism and Israel advocacy in the Senate, chairing the Bipartisan Task Forces for Combating Antisemitism alongside Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Lankford. Just days after Oct. 7, Rosen joined a bipartisan delegation to visit Israel and show support.

Her office issued a press release after that visit with the headline, “Senator Rosen Is The Only Jewish Woman And Former Synagogue President Serving In The United States Senate.”

The release quoted her saying, after meeting with families of Israelis taken hostage on Oct. 7, “As the only Jewish mother serving in the Senate, hearing their stories and seeing their pain and heartbreak was gut-wrenching. “

[cmesinic]

This is what happens when a Senator tries to work for a bipartisan solution to the border crisis.

[maswartz]

I truly never want to hear a republican blame the democrats for the border again.

[plethoraworldatlas]

The Biden administration signaled on December 12 that it is willing to make disastrous—and permanent—changes to asylum and immigration policy to obtain temporary military aid for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan.

Top White House officials reportedly met with some of the key Senate negotiators, Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ), as well as Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Unfortunately, media reports indicate the White House is willing to resurrect some Trump-era anti-immigrant policies to cut a deal on Ukraine funding. These include the nationwide expansion of a fast-track deportation process known as “expedited removal,” the expansion of mandatory detention, and the immediate expulsion of migrants at the border under a Title 42-like authority.

...

The implementation of Title 42-like authority at the border would be counterproductive at addressing migration and, instead, will result in many individuals being sent back to persecution in their home countries or forced to wait in Mexico indefinitely. Human rights organizations have tracked thousands of incidents of violence against migrants, including murder, rape, and torture, during the Biden administration’s implementation of Title 42.

Reimposing Title 42 would also fail to seriously address border crossings. Analysis from the American Immigration Council shows that these expulsions do not deter migrants from attempting to cross the U.S.-Mexico border. During the Title 42 policy, roughly one in three people apprehended after crossing the border were on their second or higher failed attempt to cross. This is confirmed by a recent analysis of DHS data from the Cato Institute, which revealed that ending Title 42 significantly reduced repeat crossings and halved so-called “gotaways.” As a result, allowing any DHS secretary to simply shut the border to asylum seekers would lead to tremendous harm to both asylum seekers and to basic principles of border management.

Dramatically expanding mandatory immigrant detention

The White House has also reportedly agreed in principle to language that would strip authority from DHS to release migrants who cross the border and are taken into custody. While many of those individuals are currently eligible for release, language currently in H.R. 2,  a Republican-supported bill that passed along party lines in the House earlier this year, would bar DHS from releasing any migrant—regardless of whether they are families or children.

The expansion of detention raises serious human rights concerns and would represent a complete break from the promises President Biden made as a candidate and while in office. Within the confines of the already expansive immigrant detention landscape, there are numerous complaints of negligent medical care, unsafe conditions, unfair and discriminatory treatment of detained migrants, and excessive use of force. Barring the release of migrants seeking protection to deter migration would only increase these abuses.

In addition, the United States simply does not have, and has never had, sufficient detention capacity to detain all migrants crossing the border, so releases would have to continue anyway. But by barring DHS from releasing migrants, Congress would also likely force the administration to restart family detention centers, leading to children suffer in detention centers for months or longer

Heightening the Standard for an Initial Asylum Screening

Negotiators are contemplating heightening the standard used for initial asylum screenings at the border. Currently, migrants must show that there is a “significant possibility” that they are eligible for asylum or similar protections, including under the Convention Against Torture. The standard was established in 1996 as a safeguard to prevent the U.S. government from breaking its international humanitarian agreements by erroneously deporting someone back to danger. If the migrant fails to show a significant possibility, they can be swiftly deported through the expedited removal process.

As we’ve seen under the Biden administration, making the standard more difficult will have not have a significant impact on newly arriving migrants. Since May, the Biden administration has been implementing a heightened standard in this initial screening process under its Circumvention of Lawful Pathways rule. Despite this, border apprehensions have risen significantly since this rule went into effect, which suggests that it has not been a deterrent.

Migrants often don’t know the nuances of immigration policy and arrive at our border simply hoping to find safety. This means that raising the standard will only result in the deportation of migrants who may have viable asylum claims but can’t immediately prove their case to an asylum officer at the border.

Third Country Transit Asylum Ban

Though the specifics are not yet known, an asylum ban for people who travel through a third country before arriving to the United States can have devasting consequences for U.S. foreign policy and for immigrants arriving in this country on visas. For example, under a bill passed along party-lines in June, an untold number of individuals could lose access to asylum for simply having an international layover on a flight to the United States. This means that even an Afghan national evacuated from Kabul via a U.S. military base in Germany could not apply for asylum for failing to apply in Germany first. A Ukrainian national whose flight stopped in London before arriving to the United States would be similarly barred.

Such a proposal ignores that many people may pass through a country where applying for asylum is impracticable or which is not safe for them, and they would be barred from asylum as a result. In addition, this proposal will not have any impact on reducing migration. Under the Biden administration’s asylum restriction, roughly 90% of migrants who cross the border between ports of entry are already banned from seeking asylum. Imposing a statutory transit ban would most heavily impact individuals who enter legally through ports of entry or who fly into the country on visas.

Expansion of Fast-Track Deportations Nationwide

On December 8, news broke that the White House would be willing to support a nationwide expansion of “expedited removal,” a fast-tracked deportation process.

Currently, expedited removal is applied to noncitizens who present themselves at a port of entry without proper entry documents, or who enter without permission within the last 14 days and are apprehended within 100 miles of the border. This process severely limits due process by allowing low-level immigration officials (not judges) to immediately order deportations without the right to an attorney.

A nationwide expansion, like previously occurred under the Trump administration, could mean that immigrant parents, children, and spouses of U.S. citizens living in the United States for years could be swept up for swift removal with little legal recourse. Due to the expedited nature of this process, migrants with pending applications for relief could be removed and Black, Brown, and Indigenous communities could be unfairly targeted. This would also require significantly more resources for immigration enforcement, as interior enforcement of expected removal would involve significant operational complexities.

Crucially, expanding expedited removal to the interior would not reduce border crossings, as the policy is already in effect at the border. It would, however, provide a powerful tool for a future administration that aimed to carry out mass deportations of recently arrived migrants.

What’s Next?

It’s still unclear whether any of these concessions can make it through both chambers of Congress. The House GOP has indicated that they want significantly broader changes to asylum and border policy, and hardline GOP senators have reportedly said that even these policies are “not nearly enough.” With the clock ticking on holiday recess, the chance that Congress can hammer out a deal and make it law by the end of December is increasingly slim.

However, in the past few days, the Senate negotiations have moved us closer to potentially seeing these Trump-era like policies becoming law. We need real policy solutions that don’t throw the immigrant community under the bus

[sjerzgirl]

These people really do hate America if they're unwilling to put money into resolving the issue just because Democrats are involved. One party governments are called autocracies, not democracies. They no longer believe in democracy.

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., has reintroduced legislation to make daylight saving time permanent across the country, which he says would end the "antiquated practice" of changing clocks twice a year.

“This ritual of changing time twice a year is stupid. Locking the clock has overwhelming bipartisan and popular support. This Congress, I hope that we can finally get this done," Rubio said in a statement Thursday.

The bill, called the Sunshine Protection Act, passed the Senate last year by unanimous consent, meaning no Senators opposed it. But it stalled in the House and expired at the end of the last session of Congress.

If it is enacted, daylight saving time, which begins in March and ends in November, would become permanent year-round in the U.S.

American Samoa, most of Arizona, Guam, Hawaii, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands do not observe daylight saving time and would not be required to under the legislation.

Several senators in both parties co-sponsored the original bill, including James Lankford, R-Okla., Ron Wyden, D-Ore., Cindy Hyde-Smith, R-Miss., Rick Scott, R-Fla., Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., and Ed Markey, D-Mass.

“Alabamians have overwhelmingly expressed their support for the Sunshine Protection Act, and I promised them I’d continue pushing to do away with the outdated practice of adjusting our clocks twice a year," Tuberville said in a statement shared by Rubio's office. "It’s time for America to move forward and stop falling back. Congress should listen to the people and make Daylight Saving Time permanent."

Markey said: “It’s past time for Congress to broaden its horizons and finally make daylight saving time permanent. With the Sunshine Protection Act, we can shine a light on the darkest days of the year and deliver more sun, more smiles, and brighter skies.”

Rep. Vern Buchanan, R-Fla., has introduced companion legislation in the House.

“There are enormous health and economic benefits to making daylight saving time permanent," Buchanan said in a statement. "Florida lawmakers have already voted to make daylight saving time permanent in my home state and Congress should pass the Sunshine Protection Act to move Florida and the rest of the country to year-round daylight saving time.”

The U.S. first adopted daylight saving time in 1918 to save oil and electricity during World War I. But now, it isn’t associated with energy savings.

A 2011 study found that it cost Indiana households an extra $9 million per year in electricity bills because they spent more on heating and cooling, even though people used lights less often.

“The real reason for why this policy came to be and we first started using it was because of energy, and right now it’s a completely open question about whether or not it saves energy,” said Matthew Kotchen, an economics professor at Yale University who conducted the research.

The country most recently experimented with permanent daylight saving in 1974, but that ended less than a year later, after eight Florida children died in traffic accidents attributed to the change.

“Every time it’s been tried in places, they often repeal it soon after,” Kotchen said.

[whatisonthemoon]

How Most Christians Became Godless Globalists

Another excellent piece of reporting and analysis from Pastors Kaylor and Underwood.

https://publicwitness.wordandway.org/p/how-most-christians-became-godless

How Most Christians Became Godless Globalists

“I would rather be labeled a ‘Christian Nationalist’ than a ‘godless globalist’ any day of the week.”

That’s how Oklahoma pastor and failed U.S. Senate candidate Jackson Lahmeyer responded over the weekend to media reports about him and Christian Nationalism. Speaking at the latest iteration of the ReAwaken America Tour just days after he was included in the PBS Frontline documentary Michael Flynn’s Holy War, Lahmeyer quickly endorsed one of his proposed binary options.

“I will embrace Christian Nationalism because,” he explained, “we are at war within this country. It is a spiritual war between good and evil. And whenever you are faced with evil, you cannot purr like nice, little kittens. You know what you have to do whenever you are faced with evil? You got to roar like a mighty lion!”

Earlier this year, he ran against Sen. James Lankford, arguing the conservative Republican and Baptist minister shouldn’t be in office because he voted to certify President Joe Biden’s presidential win. Lankford initially announced he would vote against certification but changed his mind after being shocked by the violence at the Capitol that disrupted the certification process on Jan. 6, 2021. For Lahmeyer, that vote was an unforgivable sin. Republican voters in Oklahoma disagreed, as Lankford trounced Lahmeyer by a 68% to 26% margin in the primary.

more at link...

https://publicwitness.wordandway.org/p/how-most-christians-became-godless

[theyoungturks]

Oklahoma Republican James Lankford said as part of a lengthy speech that he wanted to "make abortion unthinkable". Francesca Fiorentini and John Iadarola discuss on The Young Turks. Watch TYT LIVE on weekdays 6-8 pm ET. http://youtube.com/theyoungturks/live Read more HERE: https://www.mediaite.com/news/gop-senator-marks-50-years-since-roe-decision-by-vowing-to-make-abortion-not-just-illegal-but-unthinkable/ "Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) spoke on the floor of the U.S. Senate on Tuesday to mark what would have been the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade to push for further abortion restrictions. Lankford declared in a lengthy speech that he is not just working to make abortion illegal across the country, he wants to “make abortion unthinkable.” *** The largest online progressive news show in the world. Hosted by Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian. LIVE weekdays 6-8 pm ET. Help support our mission and get perks. Membership protects TYT's independence from corporate ownership and allows us to provide free live shows that speak truth to power for people around the world. See Perks: ▶ https://www.youtube.com/TheYoungTurks/join SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE: ☞ http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=theyoungturks FACEBOOK: ☞ http://www.facebook.com/TheYoungTurks TWITTER: ☞ http://www.twitter.com/TheYoungTurks INSTAGRAM: ☞ http://www.instagram.com/TheYoungTurks TWITCH: ☞ http://www.twitch.com/tyt 👕 Merch: http://shoptyt.com ❤ Donate: http://www.tyt.com/go 🔗 Website: https://www.tyt.com 📱App: http://www.tyt.com/app 📬 Newsletters: https://www.tyt.com/newsletters/ If you want to watch more videos from TYT, consider subscribing to other channels in our network: The Watchlist https://www.youtube.com/watchlisttyt Indisputable with Dr. Rashad Richey https://www.youtube.com/indisputabletyt Unbossed with Nina Turner https://www.youtube.com/unbossedtyt The Damage Report ▶ https://www.youtube.com/thedamagereport TYT Sports ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytsports The Conversation ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytconversation Rebel HQ ▶ https://www.youtube.com/rebelhq TYT Investigates ▶ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwNJt9PYyN1uyw2XhNIQMMA #TYT #TheYoungTurks #BreakingNews 230125__TB02_GOP_Senator_Says by The Young Turks

[mongowheelie]

GOP senator blocks resolution stating the right to emergency care includes abortion

Source: States Newsroom D.C. Bureau

GOP senator blocks resolution stating the right to emergency care includes abortion

Source: States Newsroom D.C. Bureau

More women are going to die.