Secret Back Channel Between FTX and White House Closed the Day After FTX Filed for Bankruptcy

/in , , , , , , , /by

What was the big guy’s cut?

The level of criminality and depravity in this administration is only matched by its contempt for the American people and the idea of a nation of laws. No wonder they are treating this degenerate crook like a prince. Do we have any law and order left in this country?

Secret Back Channel Between FTX and White House Closed the Day After FTX Filed for Bankruptcy

By: Jim  Hoft, TPG, December 24, 2022:

The far-left Washington Post reported on March 3 that Ukraine was dealing in crypto.

The Ukrainian government has gathered more than $42 million in cryptocurrency donations since Saturday, plus digital artwork including a limited edition worth roughly $200,000, according to blockchain analytics firm Elliptic. The challenge is how the country cashes in on these assets to fund its war needs.

Amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the CEO of FTX, Sam Bankman Fried has come forward to help a crypto donation project. He humbly announced that FTX will be supporting the Ukrainian Ministry of Finance and other communities in collecting crypto donations for the country. The Ukrainian government has received over $60 million in crypto donations from all over the world.

FTX’s CEO, Sam Bankman Fried highlighted that the war in Ukraine has been dragging on. The country is in full need of humanitarian help and access to global financial infrastructure. He also called attention to sanctions and crypto during this kind of situation. He indicated that crypto exchanges should enforce sanctions announced by the government seriously.

Keep reading…..

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: Biden’s Taliban: ‘A Woman Is a Man’s Property and Must Serve Him, Not Get Educated’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

NDAA Fails to Stop Biden’s Purge of Military

/in , , , , , , , /by

“An inappropriate use of taxpayer funds, and should be discontinued by the Department of Defense immediately.”

Unsurprising.

While Republicans rolled back some of Biden’s military cuts and managed to end the vaccine mandate for the military, they failed to reinstate military personnel forced out due to the mandate, they did nothing about wokeness in the military, which at this point is so great a threat that spending hundreds of billions on weapons systems is practically surplus to requirements if there will be no one reliable to operate them.

And the military purge of “extremists” launched by Biden’s political operatives has not been checked.

The “big win” here is a non-binding statement criticizing the political purge of opponents.

The final bill largely eschews issues related to the Pentagon’s efforts to root out extremism, but the Senate Armed Services Committee’s report accompanying its version of the bill calls for those plans to be curtailed, though the language is nonbinding.

The report language was added by Republicans with the backing of Sen. Angus King (I-Maine). It argues that the low instances of extremism in the ranks “does not warrant a Department-wide effort.” It further argues that the Pentagon anti-extremism effort “is an inappropriate use of taxpayer funds, and should be discontinued by the Department of Defense immediately.”

Which everyone is free to ignore.

This is a lawless administration whose Treasury and State Department are in violation of federal law by refusing to comply with SIGAR, the watchdog on Afghanistan. The Biden administration has responded to court setbacks on its student loan bailout or open borders by doubling down.

Senate Republicans get to claim that they did something by way of a non-binding statement in a report.

Mission accomplished.

AUTHOR

DANIEL GREENFIELD

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED VIDEO: This Week In Jihad with David Wood and Robert Spencer

RELATED ARTICLES:

Afghan officials smuggled $1,000,000,000 out before Taliban takeover as Biden poured in billions more

Sharia in Minnesota: Instructor fired for including painting of Muhammad in course on Islamic art

New Jersey: Hamas-linked CAIR wants January to be ‘Muslim Heritage Month’

Canada: Islamic conference features hate-filled, pro-jihad, pro-Sharia, anti-Semitic Muslim clerics

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

TWITTER FILES: FBI, CIA, DoD, Et al. Actively Worked With EVERY Social Media Platform to Control and Censor Speech

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

A Christmas eve Twitter drop.

In this latest drop we see the FBI, CIA, DoD, State Department, Pentagon, et.al. dictating censorship to Twitter, Facebook, Microsoft, Verizon, Reddit, even Pinterest, and many others.

This is so vast, so deep, it’s …… the whole of the state.

The files show the FBI acting as doorman to a vast program of social media surveillance and censorship, encompassing agencies across the federal government – from the State Department to the Pentagon to the CIA.

.The government was in constant contact not just with Twitter but with virtually every major tech firm.

We live in a surveillance state.

Here is the whole thread:

 

AUTHOR

 Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

FBI Assigned Personnel To ‘Look’ For ‘Violations’ Of Twitter’s Own Policies, Docs Reveal

FBI Admits It Pressured ‘Numerous Companies,’ Not Just Twitter

Previous Twitter files (scroll here).

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

California Appeals Court Upholds Injunctions against Corporate Board Quotas

/in , , , , , , , /by

This is an important victory for Judicial Watch, as well as taxpayers and stockholders.

The California Court of Appeal has upheld two injunctions against California quota requirements for corporate boards.

Earlier this year, two California trial courts had found (here and here) state quota mandates for sex, race, ethnicity, and LGBT status unconstitutional. On December 1, 2022, the California Court of Appeal denied (here and here) two separate emergency requests by the California Secretary of State to lift the injunctions.

The California courts again have upheld the core American value of equal protection under the law. Our taxpayer clients are heroes for standing up for civil rights against the Left’s pernicious efforts to undo anti-discrimination protections. Our legal team has helped protect the civil rights of every American with these successful lawsuits.
Here’s the background.

We filed a gender quota lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court in 2019 on behalf of three California taxpayers. The lawsuit challenged a 2018 law, Senate Bill 826 (SB 826), which mandated that every publicly held corporation headquartered in California have at least one director “who self-identifies her gender as a woman” on its board of directors. We successfully argued that the quota for women on corporate boards violates the Equal Protection Clause of the California Constitution. In May 2022, after a 28-day trial, the Superior Court delivered its verdict finding that “S.B. 826’s goal was to achieve general equity or parity; its goal was not to boost California’s economy, not to improve opportunities for women in the workplace nor not to protect California taxpayers, public employees, pensions and retirees.”

In 2020, we filed a separate taxpayer lawsuit challenging Assembly Bill 979 (AB 979), which Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law on September 30, 2020. The bill mandated boards of directors of California-based, publicly held domestic or foreign corporations to satisfy racial, ethnicity, sexual preference and transgender status quotas.

Our lawsuit successfully asked the Superior Court to declare the diversity quota scheme unconstitutional under California’s equal protection guarantee and to permanently enjoin its enforcement. On April 1, 2022, the Superior Court issued a ruling and opinion striking down AB 979’s diversity quotas and granting a permanent injunction in favor of our taxpayer clients enjoining the state from implementing the statute.

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch update is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Child Is Born! A Christmas Refresh for Weary Pilgrims

/in , , , , , , /by

We at The Washington Stand wish you and yours the happiest of holidays, and offer you this collection of Christmas-themed pieces as you celebrate the incarnation of Christ. Our daily email will return January 3, 2023, but we will continue to post articles on the site next week. We as TWS are thankful for your readership, and we’re privileged that you’ve joined us as we’ve launched this new endeavor. May the Lord bless you and keep you as we honor the birth of Jesus and enter into a new year!

Christmas is wonderful because, in a world of such strife and division, it is a holiday that celebrates hope and joy. What better news is there than that God has taken on flesh, being born of a woman, for us and our salvation? But perhaps this news sounds familiar and even tired to you. It could also be that the turbulence that now characterizes so much of public life and public-square engagement has worn you down. Many of us know today that, in a deep way, we need the refreshment of a good theological reset.

Praise God, that’s exactly what Christmas provides. In what follows, let’s consider four truths related to the coming of Christ that yield encouragement for weary people like you and me.

First, Christmas reminds us that the providence of God is always active. The Christmas story is not neat and tame. It’s actually pretty wild. Consider how politics and danger are entwined in the birth of Christ. A crazed pagan governor named Herod wrongly thinks that the Christ-child has landed on the earth to dethrone him. He sends out a search party of wise men that is supposed to lead him straight to the usurper. In a tangled web of circumstances, the wise men decline to honor Herod’s unrighteous command, and an angel visits Joseph to send him, Mary, and baby Jesus to Egypt (Matthew 2:7-15).

If you were writing your own narrative about how the Messiah would come into the world, a crazed pagan governor would almost certainly not fit into your plans, and you would not send the family of Jesus into Egypt (the overtones of the Exodus are thick here). Yet this is exactly how God structured things according to His perfect plan. The Father has wisely laid everything out, and we can fully trust His good design (Ephesians 1:3-14). But we must also know this: His plans may not always looklike they are unfolding. If we feel that way, and we all will, we can remember how God brought Jesus into the world, and what a strange mix of people and events played a role in the birth of the Savior.

Second, Christmas reminds us that your duty is not to track God’s doings, but to trust His character. When Mary first hears that she is going to bear the Messiah, she scarcely knows what to say or do. Luke 1:29-31 records the interaction between Mary and the angel: “But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be. And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus.” Mary did not yawn at the angel’s announcement; she was “greatly troubled” and quite confused.

We all feel a lot like Mary at times. We do not know what is happening either at large or in our own little corner of things. We too feel “greatly troubled.” We can easily slip into anxiety, fear, doubt, or anger at God in such moments and seasons. In such instances, we all need a strong dose of Mary’s trusting spirit. Mary did not understand all God was doing, but she did not doubt God. She trusted God and kept walking forward in faith. We see this truth in Mary’s example: When you fight by God’s power to trust God’s plan, you will eventually see God’s hand in clearer form.

Third, Christmas reminds us that God uses the humble and simple things of the creation for His glory. This is what we all know about the incarnation: Christ was born in a stable. It’s quite beautiful, really: Christ wasn’t born in a palace. Like Adam in the garden of Eden, Christ entered the world surrounded by life, by living things, by animals, by the humble elements of the earth. This all happened because of political events: “A decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered,” we read in Luke 2:1. As a result, “And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn” (2:7).

What a beautiful reminder this is that God dignifies what is humble. We can say it more strongly: God exalts the humble. We do well to remember the humility of the Son of God in His coming and all throughout His days on earth when we feel wronged, slighted, not recognized, and passed over. Injustice is real, but the Christian is not a grasper. In prayer, we should instead embrace a humble, simple, quiet life, whether our names are well-known or unknown. The most famous man in human history, after all, died on the cross as the servant of His people.

Fourth, Christmas reminds us that there is always hope in the darkness. If you had been present beside Joseph and Mary, you would not have felt the earth tremble. While the virgin conception is miraculous, the virgin birth was ordinary. But in this ordinary delivery of a child, all the hope of salvation can be found. This was the appointed time. This is when the King landed. This is when the devil began to sense that his hour of defeat was drawing nigh. We get a sense of all this in Galatians 4:4-5, which reads: “But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.”

In terms of the stable and the difficulties of the situation, the circumstances of Jesus’ birth did not look like “the fullness of time.” But God is working even in the toughest and strangest moments of our days. If you need some deep encouragement after a long and wearying year, remember this. By faith and repentance both in the hour of salvation and for the rest of your life as a work of growth, God is working a miracle in you. He did so not only in Bethlehem, though; He is doing so now, wherever faith in Christ and repentance in His name is found.

As far as the curse goes, God’s grace goes further.

AUTHOR

Owen Strachan

Owen Strachan is Senior Fellow for FRC’s Center for Biblical Worldview.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Interruption of Christmas

Approaching the Nativity with Childlike Faith

Failure Isn’t Final: The True Story Behind ‘It’s a Wonderful Life’

EDITORS NOTE: This The Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

13 U.S. States Warn that Giant Climate Activists Funds Are Buying Up Public Utilities

/in , , , , , , , /by

We are besieged on all sides

Paraphrasing Ayn Rand, climate as a social principle . . . condemns cities, culture, industry, technology, the intellect, and advocates men’s return to “nature,” to the state of grunting sub animals digging the soil with their bare hands.

“The dinosaur and its fellow-creatures vanished from this earth long before there were any industrialists or any men . . . . But this did not end life on earth. Contrary to the ecologists, nature does not stand still and does not maintain the kind of “equilibrium” that guarantees the survival of any particular species—least of all the survival of her greatest and most fragile product: man.”

13 US States warn that giant climate activists funds are buying up public utilities

BY: Joanne Nova, CFact,  |December 23rd, 2022|Climate, Economy, Energy|0 Comments

Move over divestment and boycott — and move in activist shareholders wielding other people’s money. After naive shareholders sold out, they didn’t have much influence over a company. But if they bought enough shares instead, they could practically run the place.
Good people left their money unguarded in pension plans and it came to be used against them.

The three largest asset managers in the world are BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard. They swept up the retirement money left unwatched in accounts Big-Government forced everyone to have. The Big Three now manage $20 trillion dollars combined. They also happen to want to end fossil fuel use and save the world — because they are nice people, right. So we face the dilemma — The citizens rejected NetZero, but the citizen’s money gives the power to men like Larry Fink, head of Blackrock, to harrass the boards of oil and energy companies in order to get NetZero through the back door.

To appreciate how influential these monster funds are, ponder that they are the largest shareholders in nine out of ten of the S&P 500 Index companies and lately, they have been buying up US power utilities.

These funds joined the climate activist clubs (like GFANZ), and made their political ambitions clear. Despite that screaming potential conflict-of-interest, the government agency that was meant to stop this sort thing (FERC) gave special approval instead. Apparently BlackRock and Vanguard were allowed to buy as much as 20% of some public utilities if they just promised to be “passive” investors who didn’t use their shares to influence management. Who needs fences, just ask the fox not to eat the chickens OK?

Imagine if someone managing a galactic-blob of money made decisions about your energy grid, and what your electricity will cost, and you got no say in it? Government by Oligarchs? They won’t care what your electricity bill is.

The US State governments are the best hope for the West. Last month 13 US State Attorney’s raised the alarm. Perhaps this was one of the reasons Vanguard dropped out of GFANZ?

This is how we win. But it’s just the start of this battle. This is one facet of the dark bubble driving the madness.
State AGs Sound the Alarm About BlackRock, Vanguard Buying Large Stakes in Utilities

Berkshire Hathaway vice chairman says he doesn’t want Larry Fink to ‘be my emperor’

The acquisition by investment managers BlackRock and Vanguard of ever-increasing shares in America’s public utility companies is setting off alarm bells from conservatives and progressives alike.

In November, 13 state attorneys general petitioned FERC to deny Vanguard’s request. Claiming that residents of their states could be harmed if utilities are compelled to stop using fossil fuels in favor of wind and solar power, the attorneys general argued that “Vanguard is not entitled to a blanket authorization to acquire substantial equity and voting power in utility companies.”

Read more.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Governor Ron DeSantis Eliminates ESG Considerations from State Pension Investments

Here Are A Dozen WOKE Horrors In Massive Omnibus Plunder

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Islamic Republic of Iran Using Fear and Terror to Quell Protestors, begins Public Hangings

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Iran’s back is against the wall. The Islamic Republic was reluctant to show its characteristic brutality toward protesters while it still hoped for world support in the form of a revived nuclear deal. The country has been under a microscope since protests began.

Last week, the UN removed Iran from women’s rights committee, of which it should never been part of in the first place. Biden also admitted that the Iran nuke deal is dead, but this still hasn’t been officially announced.

As Iran grapples with a revolution that it intensifying, including the formation of underground groups uniting to overthrow it, the Islamic regime warned of coming executions in early December. The regime’s desperation grows. Now it is once again using fear and terror to crush anti-government protests.

Iran turns to public executions in bid to crush anti-government protests

by Sanam Mahoozi and Alexander Smith, NBC News, December 19, 2022:

LONDON — Iran’s government has spent months violently cracking down on protests gripping the country. Now it has started hanging people in public — an approach some demonstrators and experts see as a desperate attempt to crush the dissent that has posed an unprecedented challenge to the clerical regime.

The first known executions of people arrested over the months of protests prompted an outcry from Western governments and human rights activists, but they came as little surprise to those involved in the demonstrations or carefully watching from afar.

“They want to create fear for the people who are involved,” Saeed, a business owner in his 30s from Tehran who is very active backing the protests on social media, said by voice note. As with all those interviewed for this story inside Iran, NBC News is identifying him only by his first name to avoid possible retaliation by the regime.

“They want to show the public that their actions will not go unpunished and that there are rules in the system,” he added, and so “families stop their children from going out to protest.”

Last Monday, officials publicly hanged a man from a construction crane in Mashhad, according to Mizan, a judiciary-run news agency. Majidreza Rahnavard was accused of “waging war on God” after he was accused of stabbing to death two members of the pro-government Basij militia in the northeast city. Human rights groups and Western governments say Iran’s judicial system is based on sham trials behind closed doors.

A week earlier, Iran executed another man, Mohsen Shekari, alleging he blocked a road in Tehran and stabbed a pro-government militia member who required stitches. Around a dozen other people have been sentenced to death, according to human rights groups.

“The regime knows it is fighting for its life,” said Abbas Milani, the director of an Iranian studies program at Stanford University. In the past, the regime has been “busy simply containing” demonstrators, he added. “Now they need to put the fear in people’s hearts again.”

Executions by hanging are far from rare in Iran, which Amnesty International says put 314 people to death last year, the most in the world after China.

But many activists and analysts alike believe the Islamic Republic is using the death penalty to terrify demonstrators into silence, after other attempts failed to quell the most significant wave of dissent since its founding revolution in 1979.

“This is very standard playbook by them; they have done this at previous protests” said Ali Ansari, a professor of Iranian history at St. Andrews University in Scotland. But this time, “if anything, they are moving quicker now to execute protesters with sham trials that even their own side are criticizing.”……

Read more.

AUTHOR

CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden’s Handlers Amp Up Spying on Israel

Israel, Juxtaposed Between Vibrant Life and a Deadly Fight For Survival: An Account of the Christian Media Summit

France: Muslim asks his girlfriend to convert to Islam, beats her into a coma

North Carolina news outlet features Hamas-linked CAIR condemning anti-Semitic sign, though Islam was not mentioned

France Condemns Israel for Deporting French-Palestinian with ‘Terrorist Links’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Con Job And A Disgrace’: Donald Trump Issues Video Response To Jan. 6 Report

/in , , , , , , , /by

Former President Donald Trump issued a video response to the release of the Jan. 6 report Friday, claiming the committee investigating the riot omitted evidence, made false statements and “did not produce a single shred of evidence” that he “intended” violence on the Capitol.

The House Select Committee released its final 845-page report Thursday, ending their 18-month investigation into the Jan. 6 riot. The committee cast blame on Trump as the “central cause” of the riot, and recommended he be banned from running for office in 2024. The Jan. 6 Committee recommended Monday that Trump be charged with obstructing an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the government, conspiracy to make a false statement and inciting or assisting an insurrection. The recommendation was directed at the Department of Justice, and the committee itself can not file charges.

In an exclusive video provided to the Daily Caller, Trump responded to the report, saying that for two years, “the American people have been besieged with lies from the partisan witch hunt known as the Unselect Committee on January 6.”

The former president said the committee omitted the part of his speech where he encouraged “protesters to make their voices heard peacefully and patriotically,” the part of his tweet where he told protesters to “go home with love and in peace” and where he called for “law and order.”

WATCH:

Trump claimed he urged the deployment of 10,000 to 20,000 National Guard troops days before the protests at the Capitol, but that “Nancy Pelosi and the D.C. mayor refused.”

“If they had listened to me, my recommendation, none of this would have happened, and you wouldn’t have heard about January 6 as you know it,” he added.

He then called the allegations from former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson about him lunging for the steering wheel to get to the Capitol an “absurd and discredited story.”

“The committee barely discussed the catastrophic security failures at the Capitol, and they didn’t discuss the other thing, the reason why everybody went there: the election, which was a corrupt disaster. They did not discuss why the doors were flung wide open … and they didn’t discuss the role of federal informants,” he continued.

“The events of January 6 were not an insurrection. They were a protest that tragically got out of control, and which the left has been weaponizing ever since, to censor, spy on and persecute American citizens. The entire phony hoax is about taking away your speech, taking away your vote and taking away your freedom,” Trump said.

“The Unselect Committee will go down in history as a con job and a disgrace. They want to stop us from taking back our country, but they will fail, they will not win. We will make America great again,” he concluded.

AUTHOR

DIANA GLEBOVA

White House correspondent.

RELATED ARTICLE: Jan. 6 Committee Recommends Four Charges For Trump

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Florida’s Scott and Rubio voted NO—Here’re the Quisling Republicans who Voted YEA on the $1.7 Trillion Omnibus Bill

/in , , , , , , , , /by

The 4,155 page, unread, outrageous $1.7 trillion Omnibus Bill passed in the Senate with 18 RINOs voting along with all Democrats in Support. McConnel and Shelby lead the establishment Republican charge and both should be totally ASHAMED of this overspending which hamstrings the new Republican House thru Sep. 2023.

This outrageous bill also funded every Democrat priority including another $45 billion to corrupt Ukraine bringing total to over $150 billion, an amount which exceeds the entire Ukrainian GNP.

When is any member of Congress going to explain to the American taxpayer what U.S. National Security Interests are being protected by all this financial support to Ukraine along with other billions in modern U.S. warfighting equipment which reduces our own defense capabilities?

These gifts to Ukraine don’t come without a high cost to Americans by adding to the unchecked inflation and rising consumer price index. What corrupt, illegal money laundering is continuing without a modicum of accountability of how these funds are being spent?

We Floridians are grateful to see that both of our Senators Rick Scott and Marco Rubio voted against this bill.

A close examination of the list of those who voted for it reinforce that many are the same establishment RINOs who voted with Democrats as follows:

  • To impeach the President of the United States Donald J. Trump;
  • To impose more red flag law gun control thru the misnamed Safer Communities Act;
  • To confirm Secretary of Homeland IN-SECURITY Mayorkas;
  • Are quislings accepting funding from Bill Gates;
  • To make it more difficult to decertify stolen elections;
  • To pass the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act;
  • Have poor performance scores by various conservative scoring organizations. See: Scorecard 117 | Heritage Action For America Freedom Index 117-2.

These culprit Senators (some of whom have announced retirement) have the audacity to call themselves conservative Republicans. They have again increased the overreaching power of the federal govt’s control over we the people; hurt the middle class; dampened liberty; reduced previous prosperity; caused higher costs of living for Americans; failed to secure our national sovereignty and put America first, etc.

©Royal A, Brown III. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES: Here Are A Dozen WOKE Horrors In Massive Omnibus Plunder

RELATED TWEET:

Full List: How Senators Voted on the $1.8 Trillion Omnibus Package

Senators that voted for the $1.7 T Omnibus bill funding Fed Govt thru Sept. 2023 including 18 Republicans and all Democrats:

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash)
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.)
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.)
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.)
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.)

Senators that voted against the bill include 29 Republicans and 0 Democrats – 3 Republicans did not vote:

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)

Senators that did not vote:

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)

Leahy Amendment

Sen. Leahy’s amendment to “amend the description of how performance goals are achieved, and for other purposes” was approved in a 65–31 vote.

Senators that voted for the amendment:

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash)
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.)
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.)
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.)
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.)

Senators that voted against the amendment:

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)

Senators that did not vote on the amendment:

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)

Paul Amendment

Sen. Paul’s amendment, “increase the voting threshold for budget points of order,” was rejected in a 34–63 vote.

Senators that voted for the amendment:

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.)

Senators that voted against the amendment:

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash)
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.)
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.)
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.)
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)

Senators that did not vote on the amendment:
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)

Johnson Amendment

Sen. Johnson’s amendment, which would have eliminated all earmarks in the bill, was rejected in a 34–63 vote.

Senators that voted for the amendment:

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.)

Senators that voted against the amendment:

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash)
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.)
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.)
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.)
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)

Senators that did not vote on the amendment:
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)

Another Johnson Amendment

Johnson’s amendment to restrict money for the Department of Homeland Security to transport illegal aliens within the United States was rejected in a 47–50 vote.

Senators that voted for the amendment:

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.)
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.)

Senators that voted against the amendment:

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.)
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.)
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.)
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)

Senators that did not vote on the amendment:
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)

Sinema Amendment

Sen. Sinema’s amendment, which would have appropriated additional money for immigration enforcement, was rejected in a 10–87 vote.

Senators that voted for the amendment:

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.)
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)

Senators that voted against the amendment:

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash)
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.)
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.)
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.)
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.)

Senators that did not vote on the amendment:

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)

Lee Amendment

Lee’s amendment, which would have prevented ending Title 42, was rejected in a 47–50 vote.

Senators that voted for the amendment:

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.)
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.)

Senators that voted against the amendment:

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.)
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.)
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.)
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)

Senators that did not vote on the amendment:
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)

Lankford Amendment

Sen. Lankford’s amendment, which was to “establish a rule of construction relating to religious entities,” was defeated in a 44–53 vote.

Senators that voted for the amendment:

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.)
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.)

Senators that voted against the amendment:

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.)
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.)
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.)
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)

Senators that did not vote on the amendment:
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)

Braun Amendment

Sen. Braun’s amendment, to “eliminate a waiver of state immunity,” was rejected in a 40–57 vote.

Senators that voted for the amendment:

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.)

Senators that voted against the amendment:

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash)
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.)
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.)
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.)
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.)
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)

Senators that did not vote on the amendment:
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)

Cassidy Amendment

Sen. Cassidy’s amendment, to force employers to provide accommodations to pregnant mothers, was adopted in a 73–24 vote.

Senators that voted for the amendment:

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash)
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.)
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.)
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.)
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.)
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.)

Senators that voted against the amendment:

Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)

Senators that did not vote on the amendment:

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)

Merkley Amendment

Sen. Merkley’s amendment, which amends the Fair Labor Standards Act to include breastfeeding accommodations in the workplace, was agreed to in a 92–5 vote.

Senators that voted for the amendment:

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash)
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.)
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.)
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.)
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.)
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.)

Senators that voted against the amendment:

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)

Senators that did not vote on the amendment:

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)

Klobuchar Amendment

Sen. Klobuchar’s amendment, to add the Merger Filing Fee Modernization Act to the omnibus, was adopted in a 88–8 vote.

Senators that voted for the amendment:

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash)
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.)
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.)
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.)
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.)
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.)

Senators that voted against the amendment:

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)

Senators that did not vote on the amendment:

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)

Gillibrand Amendment

Sen. Gillibrand’s amendment, to establish a supplemental fund for the World Trade Center Health Program, was agreed to in a 90–6 vote.

Senators that voted for the amendment:

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash)
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.)
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.)
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.)
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.)
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.)

Senators that voted against the amendment:

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)

Senators that did not vote on the amendment:

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)

Menendez Amendment

Sen. Menendez’s amendment, to allocate money to victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, was adopted in a 93–4 vote.

Senators that voted for the amendment:

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)
Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash)
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.)
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.)
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.)
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.)
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)
Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)
Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.)
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.)

Senators that voted against the amendment:

Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)

Senators that did not vote on the amendment:

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.)

AUTHOR

Zachary Stieber

Reporter

Zachary Stieber is a senior reporter for The Epoch Times based in Maryland. He covers U.S. and world news.

 

Biden Delivers Xmas Address, Avoids Mentioning Jesus Christ

/in , , , , , , , /by

President Joe Biden delivered the White House’s Christmas address Thursday evening and failed to mention Jesus by name.

“How silently, how silently, the wondrous Gift is given,” Biden began. “There is a certain stillness at the center of the Christmas story. A silent night when all the world goes quiet and all the glamour, all the noise, everything that divides us, everything that pits us against one another, everything — everything that seems so important but really isn’t, this all fades away in stillness of the winter’s evening.

“And we look to the sky, to a lone star, shining brighter than all the rest, guiding us to the birth of a child — a child Christians believe to be the son of God; miraculously now, here among us on Earth, bringing hope, love and peace and joy to the world,” Biden said. “Yes, it’s a story that’s 2,000 years old, but it’s still very much alive today. Just look into the eyes of a child on Christmas morning, or listen to the laughter of a family together this holiday season after years — after years of being apart.” [Emphasis added]

The president has repeatedly claimed he is a “devout Catholic,” despite his support for leftist policies that go against church teachings, such as abortion. Pope Francis has referred to Biden’s statements on his faith and his stance on abortion as an “incoherence.”

Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.

153 Known Connections

Biden Botches the Words of the Declaration of Independence

During a March 2, 2020 campaign rally — one day before the so-called “Super Tuesday” presidential primaries in 14 separate states — Biden tried to recite the Declaration of Independence but bungled the words badly, saying: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, all men and women created by — go, you know the, you know the thing.” The Declaration of Independence actually reads as follows: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Biden also mistakenly referred to Super Tuesday as “Super Thursday” before correcting himself…

To learn more about Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. click here.

RELATED ARTICLE: Pelosi Mocked for Wishing Americans a ‘Happy Shwanza’ in Final Speech

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Omnibus Spending Bill Does Not Secure the Border, but Further Incentivizes and Enables Illegal Immigration

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Washington, D.C. — The 117th Congress finally wrapped up business by approving a lame-duck, pork-laden $1.7 trillion spending bill – consisting of more than 4,000 pages that not a single member had the time to read and fully analyze – funding the federal government through the remainder of the fiscal year.

Passage of the omnibus coincides with a full-blown crisis along our southern border that is about to get a whole lot worse, as the Biden administration is close to ending Title 42, the last remaining mechanism in place under which a limited number of border-crossers are being removed from the country. Yet, not only did the Democratic-led Congress reject an amendment to keep Title 42 in place, they expressly barred increased funding for U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) from being used to secure the border.

“The final spending package approved by a Congress on their way out the door leaves little doubt that chaos at the border is the policy of the Democratic Party today and that their goal is to create even more of it,” charged Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). “Only a party that affirmatively wants open borders – regardless of the fiscal, security, and humanitarian costs – would let the one remaining policy that allows for the expedited removal of even some illegal migrants lapse, and deliberately tie the hands of our border enforcement agency.

“Let’s be clear, the president can restore operational control of the border simply by enforcing laws that are already on the books – many of which he voted for as a senator. Instead, he and his party continue deflect blame by claiming they inherited a broken system. The truth is they deliberately broke it themselves and are standing in the way of efforts to fix it.

“Rather than do anything to regain control of our borders, the omnibus is focused entirely on processing illegal aliens as quickly as possible and transporting them to already overwhelmed communities all across the United States. This massive spending bill effectively turns CBP into a federally administered travel agency for illegal aliens and saddles state and local governments with the costs of education, health care, housing and other basic needs for the endless flow of illegal aliens the Biden administration is waiving into the country,” concluded Stein.

Below is a summary of harmful immigration provisions included in the omnibus spending bill at the urging of Democrats, as well as proposals that were successfully defeated due in part to FAIR’s aggressively lobbying efforts.:

Harmful provisions of the omnibus:

  • Provides $1.563 billion for CBP “border management” but does not allow using those funds to hire permanent border security officers, deport illegal aliens (only allows transportation to American communities), or expand border security technologies and capabilities unless it is for improving the processing of illegal aliens. This is not “border management,” it is $1.563 billion to essentially convert CBP into a federal travel agency for illegal aliens.
  • Provides $800 million from CBP to FEMA to pay for “sheltering and other services” through grant programs awarded to open border aligned non-governmental organizations and charities. This broad appropriation could be viewed as enticing others to illegally enter the country and there is no prohibition against funds being distributed to organizations in the interior, meaning that illegal; aliens could be sheltered throughout the country under this section.
  • Prohibits the use of funds for border wall construction in certain areas.
  • Allows the Office of Refugee Resettlement to accept private donations from politically motivated organizations for the care of unaccompanied alien children.
  • Provides funds to both CBP and ICE to transport unaccompanied alien children, demonstrating that domestic transportation throughout the United States is a large part of CBP and ICE operations. This is a key enticement for parents to pay smugglers to take their children on the dangerous trek up to the southern border.
  • Provides millions for a controversial case management pilot program to aid illegal aliens facing deportation – which is being overseen by a nonprofit that has previously called for the defunding and abolition of ICE.
  • Provides $29 million for the Justice Department’s Legal Orientation Program, which empowers NGOs to coach large groups of detained aliens on immigration court proceedings. The effectiveness of this program is dubious as it does not provide actual legal counsel to aliens, the aliens who use this program are less likely to get an attorney and their matters take longer to resolve. Additionally, program participant organizations often blur the line between providing basic information about the process and providing legal advice.
  • Provides $25 million for the USCIS Citizenship and Integration Grant Program, a program utilized by many of the same NGOs receiving federal grant money to process illegal aliens. This self-congratulatory grant program has been routinely awarded to organizations involved in active litigation against DHS and does nothing to enhance the administration of the immigration system.
  • Leaves it up to the DHS Inspector General’s discretion whether to allocate funds for partnerships between state and local law enforcement to assist in enforcing immigration laws. While seemingly an independent auditor, The DHS Office of Inspector General has been mired in reports of political bias. We have already witnessed the dangerous consequences of an administration unwilling to utilize the 287(g) program as the Obama era saw a plethora of cancelled agreements. Congress is essentially relinquishing control of a critical force multiplier for immigration enforcement.
  • Allows detention contracts to be rescinded based on arbitrary performance evaluations.
  • Extends discretionary authority for DHS to issue more H-2B guest worker visas than the cap allows, which displaces American workers and drives down wages.
  • Provides funds to eliminate processing backlogs and expedite adjudication of Afghan Special Immigrant Visa cases, as well as a cap increase of 4,000. Recent reports have exposed the lack of proper vetting for many of the Afghans in the program and the associated risks to public safety and national security. Any actions taken to expedite processing will detract from security checks and further vetting activities and increase the risks.
  • All budget increases directed towards immigration enforcement are below inflation. An unprecedented border crisis calls for funds at appropriate levels – the increases are simply insufficient.

Among the damaging immigration proposals that were defeated or withdrawn during the lame duck:

  • A mass amnesty proposal led by Senators Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) in exchange for an extension of weakened Title 42 and other meaningless promises of future immigration enforcement.
  • The Afghan Adjustment Act, which would have granted permanent residence to largely unvetted Afghans who were allowed to enter the country under President Biden’s abuse of parole authority. Most of the Afghans who arrived in the U.S. after the administration’s disastrous withdrawal in 2021 played no role in assisting U.S. forces.
  • An agriculture bill containing both an amnesty for illegal aliens and an expanded guestworker program. The last farmworker amnesty, crafted in part by current Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer when he was in the House, was the most fraud-ridden immigration program in American history.
  • The Biden Administration’s attempt to slash ICE detention capacity by 30 percent.
  • The Sinema-Tester amendment to the omnibus, which sought to process and release illegal aliens into our country more efficiently.
  • The EAGLE Act, which would have resulted in more than 90 percent of employment-based green cards being awarded to citizens of just two countries: China and India.
  • The misleadingly named Veterans Service Recognition Act, which would have provided amnesty for illegal alien relatives of veterans and even allowed deported criminals to return the U.S.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Informed Americans Back Border Security. No Wonder the Media Isn’t Doing Their Job

Bad Business: Mayorkas Betrays U.S. Workers With More H-2B Visas

EDITORS NOTE: This FAIR column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

How the Chinese regime targets professors and schools to censor and indoctrinate worldwide

/in , , , , , , , /by

Editor’s Note: This is the third piece in a six-part series by J. Michael Waller on Beijing’s global network of Confucius Institutes.

Pressure on other faculty

The Confucius Institutes serve as outposts to spy or inform on American professors with China expertise who have no Institute affiliation.

The intent is to influence scholars not to divert from the CCP line while teaching their students in American classrooms, and to provide the CCP with an enforcement mechanism to deny access to China that any scholar of the country would need to remain academically relevant.

Such professors “have also reported feeling pressure in their classes to watch what they say and avoid Confucius Institute taboos. Many are wary that the wrong statement might land them on a blacklist, forbidden from visiting China for research.”[42]

The Institutes’ presence on campus then allows the CCP to apply pressure on American university leaders to ensure Party conformity in their American classrooms. Similar pressure has been reported in other countries.

Targeted professors “believe university administrators are tiptoeing around China – and asking their professors to do the same – to make sure nothing interrupts the profitable relationship with the Confucius Institute. ‘This is my career and livelihood on the line,’ said one senior professor … explaining why he wished to remain anonymous in [a National Association of Scholars] critique of Confucius Institutes.”[43]

And so the United Front Work Department enlists willing and unwilling foreigners to act on behalf of the CCP.

Distinguished scholars critical of the Confucius Institutes found themselves marginalized and alienated from their own corrupt peers even before these institutes get off the ground.

A French Ministry of the Armed Forces report recounted, “the implementation of a CI [Confucius Institute] in a university often brings about controversies, and is susceptible to divide the teaching staff, if not marginalize some of the best specialists on China because they are critical of CIs and, as such, of their colleagues cooperating with the institute, or receiving its funding.”[44]

One scholar explained, “even the most well-established experts in Chinese studies can find themselves isolated and at odds with their colleagues when they raise concerns. The worst-case scenario is when academics no longer feel able to work in a university that does not respect their professional standards, suffering from ostracization, exclusion from the university, and denial of promotion….”[45]

Some academics report being physically threatened for criticizing the Confucius Institutes. The French report cites a 2021 case in Slovakia, in which the director of the Bratislava Confucius Institute “attempted to intimidate” the director of the Central European Institute of Asia Studies, Matej Simalcik, considered “one of the leading China experts in Central Europe.” After publishing research on CCP influence in the Slovakian educational system, Simalcik received a letter from the head of the Bratislava Confucius Center, who made “explicit threats” against his person.[46]

Infiltration of Western educational institutions

China infiltrated the Ministry of Education in the Australian state of New South Wales which, as the French study noted, meant that “Beijing had appointed employees (potentially agents) inside an Australian ministry.”[47] The CCP provided language curriculum and study aids, which Australian taxpayers funded, and some schools made the CCP materials mandatory. “This decision shocked many parents, some describing this program ‘as the infiltration of the Chinese Communist Party into the NSW public school system.’”[48]

Propaganda themes and non-themes

Confucius Institutes dutifully promoted CCP themes and non-themes (that is, subjects forbidden for discussion under Party policy) in their language and cultural education programming.

China and Chinese life were portrayed as the CCP wanted them portrayed, while subjects awkward for the Party, such as human rights, religious persecution, the conquest of Hong Kong, the repression of Tibet and Xinjiang, and the present status or future invasion of Taiwan, were forbidden for discussion or avoided.[49] The Uighur minority in Xinjiang, Tibet and Tibetan people, supporters of Taiwan’s independence, the Falun Gong spiritual movement, and democracy activists are referred by the CCP as the “five poisons.”[50]

Many if not most of the American institutions conceded to CCP pressure and permitted – even enforced – the self-censorship.

Some “larger, more prestigious” schools “reportedly have successfully pushed back against or prevented PRC interference in university events, such as speaking engagements by the Dalai Lama and other figures opposed by the Chinese government,”[51] but the examples are few.

North Carolina State University, after being squeezed by its own Confucius Institute, disinvited the Dalai Lama in 2009.[52] The university sponsored four outside Confucius Classrooms, ran an estimated 636,000 people through the covert CCP programs, and “trained some 1,330 teachers in how to teach and talk about China.”[53]

Then there is the issue of reciprocity. There is no genuine academic exchange between the Confucius Institutes worldwide and schools in mainland China. Everything is one-way.

Money has also been a gray area. The Congressional Research Service observed what it called “possible incomplete reporting by U.S. universities to the Department of Education regarding funds received from China for their Confucius Institutes,”[54] raising the possibility of fraud and corruption in American higher learning. This fits what appears to be a larger pattern of non-reporting of CCP funding of US education. The FBI found that even among the most prominent faculty of the most prominent universities received large sums – often millions of dollars – through secret or unreported side deals with Chinese Communist Party schools, organizations, laboratories, and companies under the Party’s “Thousand Talents” program.[55]

It isn’t only dishonest individual faculty or even academic departments, but entire schools that engage in fraudulent activity and misleading reporting to conceal cash they receive from the CCP. A bipartisan Senate investigative report found that “Nearly 70 percent of U.S. schools with a Confucius Institute that received more than $250,000 in one year for Confucius Institutes failed to properly report that information to the Department of Education.”[56]

AUTHOR

J. Michael Waller

Senior Analyst for Strategy

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Source notes

[42] Rachelle Peterson, “The Confucius Institutes.”

[43] Peterson, “The Confucius Institutes.”

[44] Charon and Vilmer, p. 305

[45] Christopher Hughes, “Confucius Institutes and the University: Distinguishing the Political Mission from the Cultural,” Issues and Studies, 50:4, 2014, p. 66. Cited by Charon and Vilmer, p. 305.

[46] Charon and Vilmer, p. 305.

[47] Charon and Vilmer, p. 302.

[48] Kelsey Munro, “Behind Confucius Classrooms: The Chinese Government Agency Teaching NSW School Students,” Sydney Morning Herald, May 29, 2016, quoted by Charon and Vilmer, p. 302.

[49] See Peterson, “The Confucius Institutes,” for details.

[50] Sarah Cook, “The Long Shadow of Chinese Censorship: How the Communist Party’s Media Restrictions Affect News Outlets Around the World,” Center for International Media Assistance, October 22, 2013, p. 11. www.cima.ned.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/CIMA-China_Sarah%20Cook.pdf.

[51] CRS report, p. 2.

[52] Peterson, “The Confucius Institutes”

[53] Peterson, “The Confucius Institutes”

[54] CRS report, p. 2.

[55] FBI Director Christopher Wray, “The Threat Posed by the Chinese Government and the Chinese Communist Party to the Economic and National Security of the United States,” remarks to the Hudson Institute, July 7, 2020. www.fbi.gov/news/speeches/the-threat-posed-by-the-chinese-government-and-the-chinese-communist-party-to-the-economic-and-national-security-of-the-united-states.

[56] “Senators Portman & Carper Unveil Bipartisan Report on Confucius Institutes at U.S. Universities & K-12 Classrooms,” Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, United States Senate, February 27, 2019. www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/media/senators-portman-and-carper-unveil-bipartisan-report-on-confucius-institutes-at-us-universities_k-12-classrooms.

Biden Regime to Drop Half a Million on Artificial Intelligence That Detects ‘Microaggressions’ on Social Media

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Full on police state.

Biden Admin to Drop Half a Million on Artificial Intelligence That Detects Microaggressions on Social Media

President Biden On His Administration’s New Actions On The Economy

By: Philip Caldwell • Washington Free Beacon •  December 21, 2022:

The Biden administration is set to dole out more than $550,000 in grants to develop an artificial intelligence model that can automatically detect and suppress microaggressions on social media, government spending records show.

The award, funded through President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, was granted to researchers at the University of Washington in March to develop technologies that could be used to protect online users from discriminatory language. The researchers have already received $132,000 and expect total government funding to reach $550,436 over the next five years.

The researchers are developing machine-learning models that can analyze social media posts to detect implicit bias and microaggressions, commonly defined as slights that cause offense to members of marginalized groups. It’s a broad category, but past research conducted by the lead researcher on the University of Washington project suggests something as tame as praising meritocracy could be considered a microaggression.

The Biden administration’s funding of the research comes as the White House faces growing accusations that it seeks to suppress free speech online. Biden last month suggested there should be an investigation into Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter after the billionaire declared the social media app would pursue a “free speech” agenda. Internal Twitter communications Musk released this month also revealed a prolonged relationship between the FBI and Twitter employees, with the agency playing a regular role in the platform’s content moderation.

Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton likened the Biden administration’s funding of the artificial intelligence research to the Chinese Communist Party’s efforts to “censor speech unapproved by the state.” For the Biden administration, Fitton said, the research is a “project to make it easier for their leftist allies to censor speech.”

A spokesman for the National Science Foundation, which issued the research grant, rebuffed criticism of the project, which he said “does not attempt to hamper free speech.” The project, the spokesman said, creates “automated ways of identifying biases in speech” and addresses the biases of human content moderators.

The research’s description doesn’t give examples of what comments would qualify as microaggressions—though it acknowledges they can be unconscious and unintentional. The project is led by computer science professor Yulia Tsvetkov, who has authored studies that suggest the artificial intelligence model might identify and suppress language many would consider inoffensive, such as comments praising the concept of meritocracy.

Tsvetkov coauthored a 2019 study titled “Finding Microaggressions in the Wild,” which categorized microaggressions into subcategories, one of which was the “myth” that “differences in treatment are due to one’s merit.” Examples of microaggressions laid out in the paper included statements like “Your mom is white, so it’s not like you’re really black,” and questions including “But where are you from, originally?”

Tsvetkov also coauthored a July article that analyzed the “prominence of positivity in #BlackLivesMatter tweets” during the June 2020 George Floyd riots. Tsvetkov and her colleagues determined positive emotions like “hope, pride, and optimism” were prevalent in pro-Black Lives Matter tweets, evidence they said contradicts narratives framing Black Lives Matter protesters as angry.

Conservative watchdog groups raised alarm over the Biden administration’s funding of the research, telling the Washington Free Beacon the project represents a White House effort to curb free speech online.

“It’s not the role of government to police speech that some might find either offensive or emotionally draining,” said Dan Schneider, vice president of the Media Research Center’s free speech division. “Government is supposed to be protecting our rights, not suppressing our rights.”

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Godfather of AI’ Quits Google, Shares Warning About AI’s Potential For Destruction

Intel Agencies Capability to Impose “Total Tyranny” In America on NBC’s Meet the Press 1975

Twitter Emails Prove Existence of Intelligence Community Efforts to Elect Biden | Truth Over News

The Final War–The 100-Year Plot to Defeat America

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Saying ‘American’ Is Now RACIST and Stanford University’s List of Other UNACCEPTABLE WORDS

/in , , , , , , , , /by

The Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative is a “multi-phase” project of Stanford’s IT leaders.

“Stanford University” – now there’s an unacceptable term.

What will it take for the people rise against this leftist scourge destroying the country?

Stanford Scrambles To Hide List Calling ‘American’ Racist or ‘Harmful’ Language

By: Valient News, December 22, 2022:

Despite Stanford’s claims, the debate on the term “Americans” arises not out of racism, but linguistic differences between English and Spanish speakers.

Stanford University has demanded that citizens of the United States should not be referred to as “Americans,” deeming it harmful and racist language use.

In May, Stanford published an index of offensive words, as part of their “Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative,” which they described as a “multi-phase, multi-year project to address harmful language in IT at Stanford.”

“The goal of the Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative is to eliminate* many forms of harmful language, including racist, violent, and biased (e.g., disability bias, ethnic bias, ethnic slurs, gender bias, implicit bias, sexual bias) language in Stanford websites and code,” the university wrote on its website.

Keep reading…

Guide to Acceptable Words: Behold the school’s Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative — Wall Street Journal

By The Editorial Board, Dec. 19, 2022:

Parodists have it rough these days, since so much of modern life and culture resembles the
Babylon Bee. The latest evidence is that Stanford University administrators in May published
an index of forbidden words to be eliminated from the school’s websites and computer code,
and provided inclusive replacements to help re-educate the benighted.

Call yourself an “American”? Please don’t. Better to say “U.S. citizen,” per the bias hunters,
lest you slight the rest of the Americas. “Immigrant” is also out, with “person who has
immigrated” as the approved alternative. It’s the iron law of academic writing: Why use one
word when four will do?

You can’t “master” your subject at Stanford any longer; in case you hadn’t heard, the school
instructs that “historically, masters enslaved people.” And don’t dare design a “blind study,”
which “unintentionally perpetuates that disability is somehow abnormal or negative,

Appeared in the December 20, 2022, print edition as ‘The Stanford Guide to Acceptable Words’.
furthering an ableist culture.” Blind studies are good and useful, but never mind; “masked
study” is to be preferred. Follow the science.

“Gangbusters” is banned because the index says it “invokes the notion of police action against
‘gangs’ in a positive light, which may have racial undertones.” Not to beat a dead horse (a
phrase that the index says “normalizes violence against animals”), but you used to have to get
a graduate degree in the humanities to write something that stupid.

The Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative is a “multi-phase” project of Stanford’s IT
leaders. The list took “18 months of collaboration with stakeholder groups” to produce, the university tells us. We can’t imagine what’s next, except that it will surely involve more make-
work for more administrators, whose proliferation has driven much of the rise in college

tuition and student debt. For 16,937 students, Stanford lists 2,288 faculty and 15,750
administrative staff.

The list was prefaced with (to use another forbidden word) a trigger warning: “This website
contains language that is offensive or harmful. Please engage with this website at your own
pace.”

Evidently it was all too much for some at the school to handle. On Monday, after the index
came to light on social media, Stanford hid it from public view. Without a password, you
wouldn’t know that “stupid” made the list.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Liberal Students, Academics Are Out To Revoke Conservatives’ Honorary Degrees

Biden Regime to Drop Half a Million on Artificial Intelligence That Detects “Microaggressions” on Social Media

ABC Reporter Paid Thousands By Lobbying Firm To Write Hit Pieces On Targeted Politicians

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Kari Lake Trial Bombshells: Data Expert Testifies ‘No Doubt’ She Would Have Won

/in , , , , , , , , /by

UPDATE: 

Everything the Corrupt Judge Had to Ignore to Kill Kari Lake’s Lawsuit

“We can conclude with a degree of mathematical certainty that this affected this chunk of voters. Is That enough to have changed the outcome? And I am offering the opinion that that range is enough to put the outcome in doubt.”

2022 Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake and her attorneys once again took the stand on Thursday as the trial moved forward proving  she was the rightful winner of the race.

Lawyers for Lake are focusing on problems with ballot printers at a majority of the polling places in Maricopa County, home to more than 60% of voters. The defective printers produced ballots that were too light to be read by the on-site tabulators at polling places. Lines backed up in some areas amid the chaos and confusion.

Expert in Kari Lake election suit: ‘No doubt’ she would have won without Maricopa Election Day chaos

The trial is set to conclude Thursday.

By Natalia Mittelstadt, Just The News, December 22, 2022:

Election modeling expert Richard Baris said Thursday in the Kari Lake election lawsuit that his projections showed as many as 40,000 voters were disenfranchised over Election Day chaos in Arizona’s Maricopa County, causing him to “have no doubt” that she would’ve won the gubernatorial election had there been no problems at polling centers.

Baris is the final witness for Lake in the scheduled two-day trial for her election lawsuit.

Baris testified that 25,000 to 40,000 voters were disenfranchised in the county as a result of roughly one in five vote centers suffering problems with ballot tabulator machines in the first hours of Election Day

“We’ve got about 20% of the locations out there where there’s an issue with the tabulator,” Maricopa Board of Supervisors Chairman Bill Gates, a Republican, said on election night. Describing the problem, he said that after some voters filled out their ballot, the machine wouldn’t accept it. Since then, the county has admitted that 70 out of the 223 vote centers experienced issues on Election Day.

Election officials, however, assured voters their ballots would still be counted as a result of redundancy protocols.

The vote margin between Lake and Hobbs is 17,117 votes.

Baris said the net gain Lake would’ve received in the votes that weren’t cast on Election Day would have made her the winner of the Arizona gubernatorial election.

Baris testified that his firm, Big Data Poll, typically finds the difference in the exit-poll participation rates between early voters and Election Day voters is about 5-8%. In Maricopa County last month, however, the difference was about 20%, further suggesting that would-be voters there stayed home upon learning about voting machine problems.

That has “never happened to me before,” he said.

Following Baris’ testimony, Lake’s lawyers rested their case, and legal counsel for the defendants called their first witness, Kenneth Mayer, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Mayer, who said he has been involved in polling for the last 30 years, testified that there was no data to support the idea that ballot tabulator issues on Election Day caused voters to be disenfranchised and affected the outcome of the election.

The professor discounted Baris’ polling data, noting issues with self-reporting rather than using systematic methods, and said that Baris’ conclusions about his own data weren’t supported by the data.

During direct examination by the defendants’ legal counsel, he addressed the declarations regarding long wait times at vote centers, saying that the estimates widely varied and people generally do not correctly guess wait times due to the frustration of waiting in line.

Under cross-examination by Lake’s legal counsel, Mayer said that he didn’t verify the accuracy of the wait times provided by Maricopa County.

Lake, the 2022 Arizona GOP gubernatorial nominee, is suing her Democratic opponent, Governor-elect and Secretary of State Katie Hobbs; Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer; the county Board of Supervisors; and county Director of Elections Scott Jarrett.

Lake’s case alleges the “number of illegal votes cast in Arizona’s general election … far exceeds the 17,117 vote margin” between her and Hobbs.

The trial began Wednesday with the testimony of Richer, Jarrett, cybersecurity expert Clay Parikh, county temporary technician Bradley Benticort, and Republican National Committee attorney Mark Sonnenklar.

Following Baris’ testimony, the defendants’ legal team will call four witnesses to the stand, then each side will give closing arguments.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Arizona County Elections Director Scott Jarrett Admits in Court Printer Settings Were Switched on Election Day – IT WAS ON PURPOSE! (VIDEO)

Maricopa County Witness Is a Woke Professor Who Wasn’t in Maricopa County on Election Day and Who Based His Testimony on What the County Told Him

Shady Democrat Operative Ryan Macias Testifies In Kari Lake’s Election Trial – DAMNING Evidence Against Him Presented During Cross-Examination – WATCH LIVE

Katie Hobbs Witness Makes Case for Tossing Out Malfunctioning Tabulator Machines: “One of the Most Common Issues that Arises on Election Day Operations”

Shady Democrat Operative Ryan Macias Testifies In Kari Lake’s Election Trial – DAMNING Evidence Against Him Presented During Cross-Examination – WATCH LIVE

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2024 DrRichSwier.com LLC. A Florida Cooperation. All rights reserved. The DrRichSwier.com is a not-for-profit news forum for intelligent Conservative commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own. Republishing of columns on this website requires the permission of both the author and editor. For more information contact: drswier@gmail.com.