Senate Holding Slew Of Confirmation Hearings For Trump Nominees As Time Runs Short Before August Recess
The Senate will hold the hearings before the August recess
WATCH: Glenn Beck’s savage open letter torches Swalwell’s hypocrisy after sexual misconduct scandal forces campaign suspension
Last Sunday, Eric Swalwell suspended his California gubernatorial campaign after reports by the San Francisco Chronicle and CNN detailed multiple allegations of sexual assault and misconduct, which he denies. He resigned from Congress the next day amid lost endorsements and staff departures.
Now Glenn Beck reads the open letter he wrote to Swalwell to illustrate the timeless law of reciprocity.
Glenn begins by rehashing Swalwell’s public opposition to Brett Kavanaugh during his Supreme Court confirmation hearings in 2018. Tweeting #BelieveSurvivors, Swalwell argued that multiple accusers meant the allegations were likely true (or Kavanaugh was the “unluckiest person in the world”) and said victims “deserve to be heard” and their allegations investigated.
“Congressman, do you feel the same way today?” Glenn asks. “Because now you have 50 women — 50 — from your office claiming the same thing. ... Should we bring them all in? Should we question them publicly, or is this time different?”
“At the time, you even pushed back on applying strict legal standards in public judgment, noting, ‘The testimony of a single witness can prove any fact,’” he continues.
“So perhaps we just bring in one woman out of the 50 and let her speak publicly and believe her because she, as you pointed out, is a survivor.”
Glenn accuses Swalwell of showing “little to no patience for caution,” putting “little emphasis on presumption of innocence,” and lending “little concern for due process in the court of public opinion” in Kavanaugh’s 2018 hearings.
“And what’s truly sad is, at the time — unlike today — you were not alone. But boy, I bet you feel alone today,” he sneers.
“Isn’t it weird and a bitter symmetry that is happening here?” he asks. “You once argued that accusations carried its own moral force, that patterns of claims pointed towards truth no matter what, and that the accused should open themselves fully to prove their innocence.”
But now, Swalwell asks for “time,” “fairness, and “restraint.”
“The very principles you minimalized are the ones you now invoke,” Glenn says.
Calling him a “destructive, dishonest, selfish, slimy ... force” who “never seemed to care about anything other than [his] own personal agenda,” Glenn grants Swalwell what he was unwilling to grant to others: “The allegations against you, however serious, however numerous, remain allegations.”
However, Glenn isn’t the least bit sorry that Swalwell’s career, ambitions, and reputation have been destroyed.
“There’s no one who deserves to feel that pain more than you,” he says.
He then points out the irony of the progressive Marxist apparatus Swalwell has been instrumental in.
“You were destroying the progressive enemies, and so they protected you. And in that, your arrogance grew. ... You were untouchable. You were invincible — until you become an inconvenience,” he says. “And then Marxists and progressives do what they always do. Ends justify the means. You are expendable.”
The rise and fall of Swalwell, Glenn says, is a perfect example of God’s eternal law: “As you judge, so shall you be judged.”
To hear more of Glenn’s savage open letter to Eric Swalwell, watch the video above.
Want more from Glenn Beck?
To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Tulsi Gabbard secures support from another key senator
Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska announced Monday that she will vote to confirm Tulsi Gabbard, who was nominated to serve as director of national intelligence.
Murkowski's announcement came just moments after Gabbard cleared another procedural hurdle in the Senate on Monday night, teeing up her confirmation vote this week.
'I am counting on her to ensure the safety and civil liberties of American citizens remain rigorously protected.'
"I will vote to confirm Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence," Murkowski said. "While I continue to have concerns about certain positions she has previously taken, I appreciate her commitment to rein in the outsized scope of the agency, while still enabling the ODNI to continue its essential function in upholding national security."
"As she brings independent thinking and necessary oversight to her new role, I am counting on her to ensure the safety and civil liberties of American citizens remain rigorously protected," Murkowski added.
Throughout the confirmation battles of President Donald Trump's nominees, Murkowski has been a senator to watch. Most notably, Murkowski voted to block Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, along with Republican Sens. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Susan Collins of Maine.
Although these lawmakers have historically been holdouts, Collins also announced her support for Gabbard in early February.
"After extensive consideration of her nomination, I will support Tulsi Gabbard to be the Director of National Intelligence," Collins said in a statement. "As one of the principal authors of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 that established this coordinating position, I understand the critical role the DNI plays in the Intelligence Community."
While McConnell has not yet confirmed how he plans to vote, the former GOP leader voted alongside Murkowski to advance Gabbard's nomination on Monday night.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Kash Patel won’t be lectured by Democrats about ‘election denial’
The Associated Press, which has given up its role as a dispassionate news source to become a handmaiden of the Democratic Party, recently savaged "MAGA favorite" Kash Patel, whom we are warned would politicize the presumably nonpartisan FBI if he were put in charge of it. As proof that Patel could never equal the political impartiality of a Merrick Garland or perhaps James Comey, the legacy media have pointed to his unwillingness to say unequivocally that Joe Biden won the 2020 election.
Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) almost twisted himself into a pretzel during Patel’s confirmation hearing on Thursday, trying to get the nominee to recognize Biden as the victor in the 2020 presidential election. Patel kept responding to Welch’s query with the statement that Biden was declared the certified winner. When Welch in exasperation asked if Biden won that contest just as Trump did in 2024, Patel calmly replied: “Both were certified as winners.”
The reality is that Patel had no intention of vouching for the integrity of an election he may still view askance.
Allow me to confess that I love how Patel responded to Welch’s grilling for several reasons. One, the nominee had no reason to let a hostile opposition party push him into distancing himself from his presidential benefactor. Patel took the proper, indeed obligatory, position by stating the obvious about both presidential victors being certified and leaving the matter at that.
Two, Welch and just about every other Democratic senator is Patel’s enemy and will undoubtedly vote against him. You should never try to accommodate your adversaries by letting them drive a wedge between you and the president you intend to serve. I can’t imagine why Patel, unless he were an utter fool (which he obviously is not), would fall into that trap.
Three, Congress is full of Democratic election deniers, starting with Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), James Clyburn (D-S.C.), Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), and, of course, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). If Welch is so concerned about election deniers in government, then perhaps he could show his sincerity by going after the offenders in his own party.
In fact, Welch’s party has a long history of election denying, going back well before 2020; one can easily find statements by Hillary Clinton and even Joe Biden questioning Republican presidential victories. As early as 2005, 31 Democratic members of Congress denied that George W. Bush won the state of Ohio in the 2004 presidential election. As Karl Rove shows, Bush won Ohio easily, and Clyburn, the black activist Democratic congressman to whom Biden owed his nomination in 2020, engineered the attempt to remove the Buckeye State from W’s column. Why should Patel submit to being questioned about election denial by members of a party that has regularly indulged in that practice?
Although I don’t know for sure whether Democratic cheating determined the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, it wouldn’t surprise me if it did. Everything the Democrats have done suggests they will employ any trick to win elections. Blocking voter identification laws, trying to register those illegal aliens they’ve obviously brought into the country as future Democratic voters, working to move elections from more to less supervised settings, and trying to throw a powerful presidential opponent into jail or having him removed from state ballots to keep him from running were all actions that Democrats have taken against Trump. Let’s also remember those Democratic Party officials who tried to keep social media from sharing anything that might hurt the Democrats’ chances of winning the 2020 election.
The Democrats belabor Republicans with the charge that they don’t really recognize Biden’s victory in 2020, and they expect Republican candidates and nominees to answer this charge by loudly affirming the indisputable character of Biden’s election. But the Republicans will be given no brownie points even if they provide the desired answer.
Conceding that the 2020 election was fraud-free also provides at least indirectly a justification for the incarceration of hundreds of January 6 demonstrators, only a small number of whom were involved in physical violence. If the 2020 election was as clean as Democrats and their media friends want us to believe, then should we assume that many of those who have been complaining about electoral fraud have been lying to us?
Perhaps the protesters on January 6 were just looking for an excuse to devastate our Capitol and commit insurrectionary acts. If we believe on the other hand that the 2020 election raised justifiable suspicions, that it looked “rigged” — to borrow the title of Mollie Hemingway’s book — then we are recognizing that there were extenuating circumstances for those who were upset enough to demonstrate unlawfully.
The reality is that Patel had no intention of vouching for the integrity of an election he may still view askance. The election understandably looked fishy to him even if neither he nor I can prove incontestably that massive fraud determined that election’s outcome.
Watch Bernie Sanders melt down when RFK Jr. calls out Big Pharma campaign donations
When Robert F. Kennedy Jr. walked into his second Senate confirmation hearing, he brought a new weapon with him: exposing the hypocrisy.
In the first go-around, several Democrat senators, including Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), raked him across the coals for having a conflict of interest. Both were concerned about the profits he has already made and could potentially make as secretary of HHS from exposing the medical-industrial complex. That wouldn’t be ethical, they chided.
Of course, both of these senators received large campaign donations from Big Pharma. But Kennedy never mentioned this convenient information. Maybe because he was constantly being interrupted and was too busy trying to debunk the lies told about him.
But that changed in round two.
Sara Gonzales plays the clip of when Kennedy exposed Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) for receiving $1.5 million in donations from the health care industry during his second hearing.
“By the way, Bernie, the problem of corruption is not just in the federal agencies. It’s in Congress, too. Almost all the members of this panel, including yourself, are accepting millions of dollars from the pharmaceutical industry,” he said.
“No, no, no, no, no!” Sanders reacted, wagging his finger.
“I got millions and millions of contributions. They did not come from the executives, not one nickel of PAC money from the pharmaceutical industry. They came from workers,” he added, turning redder by the second.
“In 2020, you were the single largest receiver of pharmaceutical money … $1.5 million,” Kennedy reiterated.
“Because I had small contributions from workers all over this country! Workers! Not a nickel from corporate PACs!” Sanders shouted before trying to rapidly change the subject.
“Guilty conscience got you, Bern?” laughs Sara.
“Can we just get rid of lobbyists?” pleads BlazeTV contributor Matthew Marsden.
Sara agrees that lobbyists need to go but knows it’ll never happen. “They will never agree to that” because “you’re not going to bite the hand that feeds you.”
Jaco Booyens adds that they will never agree to ban lobbyists for the same reason they will never vote to enact term limits: Both would be career suicide.
So much for being public servants.
To hear more of the conversation and watch the footage of Bernie Sanders losing his marbles, watch the clip above.
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
'Bobby may be willing to play nice — I won’t': Nicole Shanahan threatens to primary senators who vote against RFK Jr.
Here’s the attitude of those on the left in a nutshell: They’re the party of acceptance, tolerance, and inclusivity … until you disagree with them. The moment you dare to have a different perspective, suddenly their deep-seated animosity is on display for all to see.
Democrats’ treatment of RFK Jr. is a prime example.
“His alignment with Donald Trump is something that they cannot stand because more than they hate you, more than they hate me, because we hold values that are actually based in principle, based in religious belief, based in morality … the left cannot stand when one of their own defects,” says Liz Wheeler.
This was never more obvious than during Kennedy’s Senate confirmation hearings.
Senator Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), for example, asked Kennedy in a “condescending, accusatory tone” if he was nothing more than a “rubber stamp” for Donald Trump.
Thankfully, this attempt to “trigger” him didn’t impact his response.
With confidence, he answered, “President Trump has asked me to end the chronic disease epidemic and make America healthy again.”
And when Sen. Masto asked if that was the “only reason” he’s headed to HHS, Kennedy was clear again: “President Trump has asked me because I am in a unique position to end that, and that is what I’m doing, and if we don’t solve that problem, Senator, all of the other disputes we have about who’s paying, whether it’s insurance companies, whether it’s providers, whether it’s HMOs, whether it’s patients or families — all of those are moving deck chairs around on the Titanic. Our ship is sinking. ... We have the highest chronic disease burden of any country in the world.”
America’s chronic disease epidemic “is an existential threat economically, to our military, to our health, to our sense of well-being, and it is a priority for President Trump, and that's why he asked me to run the agency, and if I'm privileged to be confirmed, that's exactly what I'll do,” he reiterated.
Senator Masto, says Liz, “has the power to propagate the chronic disease crisis in our children.”
“If she votes no, she's voting in favor of autism and ADHD and childhood obesity and childhood diabetes and autoimmune disorders and cancer and infertility and a mental health crisis, the likes of which no country on Earth has ever seen before,” she condemns.
Further, just the verbiage of her question — “Is that the only reason why you’re at HHS?” — is evidence that she doesn’t care about the health of Americans.
Liz says she might as well have asked, “Just [ending the chronic disease epidemic]? Not any of my interests? Not the interest of my lobbyists? Just your family and your children and your health? That's all that you're going there to fix?”
While this hearing was maddening to watch, Liz notes that the bright side is that it “exposed the swamp” and ignited the passion of especially MAHA moms to see its demise.
RFK Jr.’s former running mate, Nicole Shanahan — “the prototype of a MAHA mom,” says Liz — posted a video promising to primary senators who vote against Kennedy.
— (@)
“While Bobby may be willing to play nice — I won't. If you vote against him, I will personally fund challengers to primary you in your next election, and I will enlist hundreds of thousands to join me,” she threatened.
“Big Pharma and Big Ag have exploited us for far too long. It ends now. You're either on the side of transparency and accountability, or you are standing in the way. The choice is yours. Please choose wisely,” Shanahan concluded.
“Call your senators!” Liz pleads.
Want more from Liz Wheeler?
To enjoy more of Liz’s based commentary, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Criticism Of ‘Big Pharma’ Is An Attack On America’s ‘Sick Care’ System, Not Modern Medicine
Kennedy railing against 'Big Pharma' in this week's Senate hearings wasn't as much an effort to 'scapegoat' the industry as much as it was a rallying cry to pressure the health care system into offering true "health care."Sens. Wyden & Warren slam RFK Jr. for conflicts of interest, but campaign donor records SCREAM hypocrisy
In yesterday’s heated confirmation hearing, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who’s poised to fill the role of health and human services secretary, was attacked repeatedly by Democrat senators who hurled accusations at him, cherry-picked from his books and podcast interviews, asked him loaded questions, and interrupted him every time he tried to speak.
It was clear that their aim was to villainize Kennedy as a money-grubbing conspiracy theorist with a conflict of interest.
One of the worst offenders was Democrat Senator Ron Wyden (Ore.), who accused Kennedy of prioritizing money above Americans’ health.
“Mr. Kennedy has embraced conspiracy theories, quacks, charlatans, especially when it comes to the safety and efficacy of vaccines. He has made it his life's work to sow doubt and discourage parents from getting their kids lifesaving vaccines. It has been lucrative for him and put him on the verge of immense power. This is the profile of someone who chases money and influence wherever they lead, even if that may mean the tragic deaths of children,” he said.
Hmmm … it almost sounds like he’s protecting Big Pharma.
Which, of course, is exactly what he’s doing. One look at his campaign donors tells you all you need to know.
Sara Gonzales brings the receipts.
“$1.5 million [in donations] from the health care industry,” she says, reading from campaign donation records.
Some of the donors include Molina Healthcare, a “vaccine manufacturer,” “Quest Diagnostics lab testing,” who only gets richer the sicker you get,” says Sara, and “Novo Nordisk,” which is in the “diabetes” branch of health care.
“Yes, Senator Wyden, let's talk about conflicts of interest. Let's talk about placing money over the health and safety of our children,” she condemns.
By no means was Senator Wyden the only reprobate on the panel, though. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) was arguably even worse.
In her first line of questioning, Warren asked Kennedy if he would vow not to take money from any company in the medical industry for at least four years following his role at HHS. Kennedy agreed without pushback and even laughed that drug companies would never give him money anyway.
However, in her next line of questioning, Warren took a dramatic turn.
“I want to know if you will commit right now that not only will you not go to work for drug companies, you won't go to work suing the drug companies and taking your rake out of that while you're a secretary and for four years after,” she said, leading to a heated exchange with Kennedy, during which he accused her of trying to get him to agree to not sue vaccine companies.
Why would Warren want to prevent Kennedy from suing Big Pharma?
Again, campaign donation records paint a clear picture.
“She takes $748,158 donor dollars from the health care industry … almost $126,000 from pharmaceuticals, $108,000 from hospitals, and she has also accepted a donation from Beverly Sackler,” who is the matriarch of Purdue Pharma, the company that developed OxyContin.
“But she wants to talk to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. about any potential conflicts of interest?” asks Sara.
“These people are disgusting. They act like they care about the health and safety of not only American children but Americans everywhere, and meanwhile, they are profiting off of these pharmaceutical companies.”
To see the campaign donation receipts from other senators who accused Kennedy of having a conflict of interest, watch the clip above.
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com
thefederalist.com
thefederalist.com