Russia debuts new hypersonic missiles in strike on Ukrainian munitions depot



The war in Ukraine might be about to take a dark turn as Russian forces deploy the use of hypersonic missiles. This marks the first time Russian forces have used hypersonic missiles in combat.

The Kinzhal hypersonic missiles were used by Russian forces to destroy an underground ammunition storage facility in Delyatyn, Ivano-Frankivsk Oblast.

The Daily Star reported that information on the attack remains scant but that Russia has long boasted about its hypersonic weapons arsenal which contains missiles that can evade traditional anti-missile defense systems.

These missiles include the 3M22 Zircon missile which is a low-flying rocket that is able to speed past early detection technologies. It, and other similar weapons in the Russian arsenal, have a range of around 1,000 kilometers.

The state-owned Russian television network, TV Zvezda, said that “The Russian Zircon hypersonic missile’s stealth features have been disclosed” indicating that this missile was, in fact, utilized against the Ukrainians.

“The speed of the Zircon hypersonic missile is so high that it prevents the opponent’s air defense system from detecting its impact in time,” the state-owned network boasted.

It continued by suggesting that “[the missile’s] launch will be known only after the target has been hit” and that the missile has “variable trajectory” making it difficult for even advanced defense systems to detect it.

Igor Krokhmal, the launching frigate’s commander, said, “No one will see the missile launch or its flight. They will only see when the missile hits the target.”

The U.S. Sun reported that Krokkhmal said there won’t be anything that can counter the Zircon missile for years to come.

He said, “A surface target, a coastal target. I don’t think there will be anything to counter this in the next few years.”

In December, when the missile was being tested, Russian President Vladimir Putin said, “Zircon are our newest missiles fired from the sea at sea targets, and land targets.”

He added, “The [missile] tests were carried out successfully, flawlessly” and said that “this is a big event for our country, a significant step in improving Russia’s security, in increasing [our] defensive capability.”

Similarly, last-October, the Chinese government launched a nuclear capable hypersonic missile into space that was able to circle the globe without being detected.

The Long March rocket, operated by the China National Space Administration, purportedly caught American intelligence agencies by surprise.

“We have no idea how they did this,” an anonymous U.S. official told the Financial Times.

Sen. Tom Cotton passionately defends filibuster in speech written entirely from Chuck Schumer's past statements



Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton (R) highlighted the blatant hypocrisy of Democrats, and particularly of Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), in an impassioned speech consisting entirely of Schumer's past statements defending the legislative filibuster.

Ahead of President Joe Biden's scheduled meeting with Democratic lawmakers to discuss a strategy to change the Senate's rules and ram through his agenda, Cotton took to the Senate floor Wednesday to remind everyone how Schumer vigorously opposed such efforts in the past.

"Right now we are on the precipice of a constitutional crisis. We are about to step into the abyss," Cotton said, quoting from a 2005 speech Schumer gave denouncing the so-called "nuclear option" of eliminating the filibuster — a 60-vote requirement to advance legislation in the Senate.

BREAKING: Chuck Schumer* speaks on the Senate floor in defense of the filibuster.\n\n*Senator Cotton\u2019s speech consisted entirely of Senator Schumer\u2019s past statements.pic.twitter.com/zGfbpr7G5t
— Tom Cotton (@Tom Cotton) 1642018461

For months now, Schumer has attempted to persuade moderate Democrats to vote to end the filibuster to pass a federal overhaul of U.S. elections, as well as the majority of Biden's economic agenda. On Jan. 3, he sent a letter to his Democratic colleagues announcing that the Senate would vote on a rules change, which led to widespread condemnation from Republicans and accusations of flagrant hypocrisy.

After all, as Cotton demonstrated, Schumer has a lengthy record of statements castigating Republicans for considering the nuclear option.

"Are senators merely doing their jobs as legislators, responding to a generalized public calling for the abolition of the filibuster? Clearly not," Cotton said, reading from Schumer's speech.

"It is not the American people at large who are demanding detonation of the nuclear option," he said. "The nuclear option is being pushed largely by the radioactive rhetoric of a small band of radicals who hold in their hands the political fortunes of the president."

Cotton also quoted from a speech Schumer gave in 2003, vigorously defending the filibuster as "embodied in the spirit and rule of the Constitution."

"The Senate is not a majoritarian body," Cotton quoted, thumping his podium for emphasis and mimicking Schumer's speech patterns as he read through a litany of increasingly outrageous predictions the top Democrat made denouncing the nuclear option.

Schumer is not the only Democrat to flip his position on the filibuster. Biden, a former senator, also gave a 2005 speech passionately defending the filibuster.

"I think it may be one of the most important speeches for historical purposes that I will have given in the 32 years since I have been in the Senate," Biden said at the time. "At its core, the filibuster is not about stopping a nominee or a bill — it's about compromise and moderation," he explained.

But in remarks given Tuesday, the president said Democratic lawmakers should change the Senate's rules and advance a sweeping federal overhaul of U.S. elections to undo GOP-supported election integrity laws.

Biden will meet with the Senate Democratic Caucus on Thursday to "discuss the urgent need to pass legislation to protect the constitutional right to vote and the integrity of our elections against un-American attacks based on the Big Lie, and to again underline that doing so requires changing the rules of the Senate to make the institution work again," a White House official said Wednesday.

Democratic references to the "Big Lie" refer to former President Donald Trump's unproven allegations that the 2020 presidential election was fraudulent.

Regardless of the president's backing and Schumer's hypocrisy, Senate Democrats lack the votes to end the filibuster. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) reaffirmed his support for the filibuster hours before Biden delivered his speech on Tuesday. Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) also remains opposed to ending the filibuster, as do several other lawmakers including Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), who have so far flown under the radar while the two aforementioned senators have captured the attention and scorn of the mainstream media.

Sen. Joe Manchin still opposes ending the filibuster, even as Democrats throw a tantrum after GOP blocked Jan. 6 commission



Progressive activists and several Democratic senators are throwing a tantrum and yet again are demanding an end to the filibuster after Republicans blocked a bill last week to create a "9/11-style" commission to investigate the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.), like an exhausted parent, is telling them "no" for what seems like the millionth time.

After the Jan. 6 commission bill was filibustered, Manchin released a joint statement with Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) imploring Republicans to work with Democrats to reach a bipartisan agreement to form the commission. But reporters insisted on hounding Manchin with questions on whether he would continue to oppose ending the filibuster.

"I'm not separating our country, OK?" an exasperated Manchin told them. "I don't know what you all don't understand about this. You ask the same question every day. It's wrong."

The 73-year-old lawmaker, who has the distinctive reputation of being the last moderate Democrat in the U.S. Senate, said ending the 60-vote requirement in the Senate would be tantamount to destroying the government by removing the need for both parties to cooperate to advance legislation.

This is at least the seventh time Manchin has made his position unambiguously clear since last July when he told CNN that then-candidate Joe Biden's openness to killing the filibuster was "bulls**t."

"The whole intention of Congress is basically to have a little bit of compromise with the other side," Manchin said July 23. "Our job is to find common and cooling ground, if you will, to make something work that makes sense."

But after Biden was declared the winner of the presidential election and since Democrats wrested control of the Senate from Republicans, Manchin has been asked about the filibuster again, and again, and again every time it becomes apparent that Republicans will oppose major pieces of President Joe Biden's left-wing agenda.

Even an April 7 op-ed Manchin wrote titled, "I will not vote to eliminate or weaken the filibuster," has not stymied the questions on his position, which were renewed as Senate Democrats prepare to go to political war this summer.

In June, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is expected to bring up major pieces of the Biden agenda in the Senate. The Democratic overhaul of U.S. elections, the Equality Act, and gun control are all on the table as Schumer lays the groundwork to blame the Republican minority and the filibuster for stalling progress during Biden's first term ahead of the midterm elections.

"We have also seen the limits of bipartisanship and the resurgence of Republican obstructionism. ... Senate Democrats are doing everything we can to move legislation in a bipartisan way when and where the opportunity exists," Schumer wrote in a letter to his Democratic colleagues.

"The June work period will be extremely challenging. I want to be clear that the next few weeks will be hard and will test our resolve as a Congress and a conference," he said.

Several Democratic senators are already resolved to blame Republican obstruction and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and the filibuster for every failed Democratic effort in the weeks to come.

"Filibustering a bipartisan commission regarding the January 6 insurrection is a three-dimensional way to make the point that the filibuster is primarily a destructive force in American politics," Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) said last Tuesday.

The following Friday, Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) told NBC's "Meet the Press" that Senate Democrats should not suffer Republicans using the filibuster.

"I think we should not perpetuate McConnell's bastardization of the Senate filibuster," he said.

It's unclear what Senate Democrats think they can do tangibly to circumvent the Republican minority's filibuster threats with both Manchin and Sinema opposed to changing the rules.

For now, it appears Democrats will rely on pressure from their base to change Manchin's mind.

"For some of my colleagues on the Democratic side, who support the filibuster in the extreme, we're going to have to have an explanation," Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, told The Hill. "Look at the extreme. It is just indefensible."

More than 50 progressive activist groups have banded together to create that pressure, issuing a joint statement last Friday calling on Democrats to end the so-called legislative "veto" of the Republican minority.

"The path forward is clear: The filibuster must be eliminated as a weapon that a minority of senators can wield to veto popular democracy-protecting bills," the statement said.

But without Manchin's support the filibuster will stay. Progressives and journalists have been badgering him about his position on the filibuster for nearly a year now.

He hasn't changed his mind.

Schumer and Dems have a plan to dodge the filibuster and pass Biden's big-spending agenda



Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) believes he has found a way to use the Senate's rules to end-run around the filibuster and pass major pieces of President Joe Biden's legislative agenda with a simple majority vote.

Major pieces of Biden's agenda like the $15 federal minimum wage, amnesty with citizenship for 11 million illegal aliens, or a new federal assault weapons ban are unlikely to muster enough Republican support in the 50-50 Senate to overcome the threat of a legislative filibuster. Democrats need 60 votes to close debate on a pending bill, and as long as they are unwilling to compromise their radical progressive agenda they won't find 10 Republicans willing to lend their support to it.

But multiple reports indicate Senate Democrats think they've found a way to bypass a potential filibuster and that they will try it to advance Biden's $2 trillion infrastructure proposal.

The plan involves using budget reconciliation — a somewhat obscure legislative rule that a majority can use to pass bills with budget-related items with a simple majority vote.

Under the current interpretation of the Senate's rules, budget reconciliation can only be used once every fiscal year when Congress passes a budget resolution. Last year, Congress failed to pass a budget resolution, so Democrats used their fiscal year 2021 budget reconciliation to pass the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill. They can still use the FY 2022 budget reconciliation this year to pass another piece of Biden's agenda, be it infrastructure or tax increases, a climate bill, or additional health care reform.

Democrats lack the votes to end the filibuster outright. So to pass more bills, they will attempt to revise the current budget resolution and argue that the revision makes it possible to use budget reconciliation again to pass another bill.

As a Senate aide to Schumer explained to CBS News:

... a Schumer aide said the majority leader is asking the Senate parliamentarian whether he can revise the current budget resolution to allow for another reconciliation process to pass the infrastructure package.

Top Schumer aides have asked the parliamentarian about using Section 304 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to allow for a second reconciliation process this fiscal year. The parliamentarian is an expert on the obscure procedures of the Senate, and can determine whether certain actions are permitted under Senate rules.

Schumer aides argue that Section 304 would allow for a second reconciliation process to be used this fiscal year, because it says "the two Houses may adopt a concurrent resolution on the budget which revises or reaffirms the concurrent resolution on the budget for such fiscal year most recently agreed to."

If the parliamentarian agrees with Schumer's argument, the Democratic majority in the Senate (with Vice President Kamala Harris' tie-breaking vote) could use budget reconciliation as many times as they please to pass any bill that is related to the budget. But even should the parliamentarian disagree, Schumer still has options. The Democrats can pass the FY 2022 budget resolution this year and the FY 2023 budget resolution next year, giving them an opportunity to use budget reconciliation at least twice more during Biden's first term.

There is also the nuclear option. If the Democratic majority votes to overrule the parliamentarian's interpretation of the Senate rules, they can create a new precedent that becomes the Senate rule on budget reconciliation. In the short term, that would mean Democrats can advance more bills without the threat of a filibuster. But in the long run, they may come to regret doing so when Republicans have a majority and recapture the White House.

Ben Shapiro hits AOC with history lesson after she lashes out over Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation



Democrats exploded in anger Monday after Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed to the Supreme Court and then sworn in as the court's newest associate justice. They promised retaliation and blamed Republicans for escalating tribalism in American politics.

But conservative commentator and lawyer Ben Shapiro was quick to provide Democrats with a history lesson.

What did Democrats say?

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) said expanding the Supreme Court and packing it with liberal justices is necessary because such measures will fix what she called a "broken system."

"Remember that Republicans have lost 6 of the last 7 popular votes, but have appointed 6 of the last 9 justices," Omar claimed. "By expanding the court we fix this broken system and have the court better represent the values of the American people."

Meanwhile, Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) said Democrats should not stop at the Supreme Court — he said Democrats should pack the entire federal judiciary with liberal justices.

Enter Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who claimed that Republicans are "bulldozing" their agenda into reality.

"Expand the court," Ocasio-Cortez said immediately after the Senate confirmed Barrett.

"Republicans do this because they don't believe Dems have the stones to play hardball like they do. And for a long time they've been correct. But do not let them bully the public into thinking their bulldozing is normal but a response isn't. There is a legal process for expansion," she added.

Republicans do this because they don’t believe Dems have the stones to play hardball like they do. And for a long t… https://t.co/OWrvsA68SP
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez)1603758089.0

What's the truth?

As Shapiro was quick to point out, Democrats began political escalation — particularly in the Senate — years ago, and those chickens are now coming home to roost.

According to Shapiro, Democrats are responsible for the political environment that has resulted in the confirmation of judges like Barrett.

"The funniest part about this tweet is that Democrats were first to destroy judicial candidates for mere interpretational disagreement, the first to use the filibuster against judges, and the first to nuke the filibuster against judges...but she thinks the Republicans started it," Shpairo wrote in response to Ocasio-Cortez.

The funniest part about this tweet is that Democrats were first to destroy judicial candidates for mere interpretat… https://t.co/PJE6yD0EG6
— Ben Shapiro (@Ben Shapiro)1603760051.0

Indeed, Senate Democrats have spent decades tearing down conservative-leaning judges nominated to the federal judiciary.

The climax of such behavior happened in the fall of 2018 during Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court confirmation, when Democrats pushed unsubstantiated claims that he was a serial sexual assaulter.

Meanwhile, as the Heritage Foundation explains, the filibuster, implemented in the early 1800s, was originally meant for legislative purposes, but Democrats were the first to invoke the filibuster in 2003 against nearly one dozen federal judicial nominees appointed by then-President George W. Bush.

And who could forget when, in 2013, then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) forever changed the landscape of the Senate by invoking the so-called "nuclear option" to lower the vote-threshold required to approve federal judges. Democrats did this in retaliation against Senate Republicans — who at the time were in the minority in the Senate — for taking a play from the Democratic playbook and using the filibuster to block many of then-President Barack Obama's executive nominees.

Previously, judges and executive nominees needed three-fifths approval, or 60 votes in the Senate, to end debate on their confirmation. But because Democrats changed the rules, only a simple majority, or 51 votes, is required to end debate on confirmation.

One year later, Democrats confirmed 89 federal judges using the re-written rules.

After Democrats changed the rules, then-Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell left Democrats with a sobering warning, "You'll regret this — and you may regret this a lot sooner than you think."

Turns out, McConnell was right.

Trump and one GOP senator call for 'nuclear option' to pass wall funding. But Jeff Flake and others will stop it

The House of Representatives on Thursday passed a spending bill that will avert a government shutdown and pay $5.7 billion toward construction of a border wall after President Donald Trump declared he would not sign a bill that did not include wall funding. Now that this legislation moves to the Senate, where it will likely fail to meet the 60-vote threshold to overcome a filibuster, President Trump is calling on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., to invoke the "nuclear option" and end the filibuster.

Trump's demand was echoed by Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont.

&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rollcall.com%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Fsteve-daines-nuclear-option-border-wall

Changing the rules of the United States Senate to end the filibuster will require a 51-vote majority agreeing to the changes. As it stands now, with 51 Republicans in the Senate, every single GOP senator would need to vote for the rule change to invoke the nuclear option.

At least three Republicans have publicly announced they will not vote for the nuclear option.

The nuclear option is not happening in the United States Senate. Fortunately, there are other ways to overcome a Democratic filibuster and pass wall funding, if McConnell is willing to have the fight.

Keep reading...Show less