Friday, November 17, 2023

What Would a Second Trumpocracy Mean?

 In his mind, a second term as president clearly has little to do with benefiting the country, the Republican Party, or even the rest of his family.



If he becomes the official nominee of the Republican Party in next year’s presidential race, Donald Trump will receive tens of millions of votes in the general election. He may get less than the presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden. He may get more. Regardless, tens of millions of GOP, conservative, and extremist voters will cast their ballots for him.

In 2016, despite his history of elitist, racist, and sexist behavior, failed businesses, lack of governing experience, and no demonstrated past of caring for anyone but himself, he won nearly 63 million votes. While still almost three million fewer votes than Hillary Clinton got, it was not just enough for a victory in the Electoral College but a clear warning of things to come.

In 2020, after four years of non-stop chaos, the death of more than 200,000 Covid victims at least in part because of his mishandling of the pandemic, a legitimate and warranted impeachment, abuse of power, ceaseless corruption, and more than 30,000 documented public lies, he gained 74 million votes, even if, in the end, he lost the election.

Now, in addition to all that history, you can add on the incitement of a violent insurrection, a second impeachment for attempting to overthrow the government, four criminal indictments (91 separate charges), being found liable for sexual abuse, and a stated plan to exact retribution against his enemies in a second term. And yet he will undoubtedly again receive many tens of millions of votes.

In fact, you can count on one thing: the 2024 election will not resolve the authoritarian attraction that the Trump vote represents. So perhaps it’s time to prepare now, not later, for the political crisis that will undoubtedly emerge from that event, whatever the vote count may prove to be.

The Authoritarian Threat Continues

A year from the next election, multiple scenarios are imaginable including, of course, that neither Donald Trump nor Joe Biden will be contenders. While Biden’s health seems fine at present, he will be only weeks away from his 82nd birthday on Election Day 2024. A lot can happen, health-wise, in a year. When it comes to Trump, however, Biden is now likely to be significantly healthier (mentally and physically) than him. Among other things, no blatant lies or well-tailored suits can hide his unhealthy obesity.

And while he relishes castigating Biden’s cognitive state, it was Trump who only a few weeks ago, while giving a speech attacking the president’s capabilities, stated that he beat “Obama” in an election, that Americans needed IDs to buy bread, and that Biden would lead the country into “World War II,” which just happens to have ended 78 years ago. While some of Trump’s GOP opponents like Vivek Ramaswamy, Ron DeSantis, and Nikki Haley have indeed launched ageist attacks against him, it’s true that he’s roughly in the same age group as Biden.

Meanwhile, don’t forget that Donald Trump’s legal health is on life support. It’s a good bet that, in 2024, he will spend more time in courtrooms than on the campaign trail. He may very well face that moment of truth when he has to decide to cut a deal that keeps him out of prison and out of the White House.

In any case, the current trajectory remains Biden vs. Trump 2.0 while, whatever the outcome of the election, this nation seems to be headed for a crisis of historic proportions. No matter who wins, next November 7th will do nothing to end the divisions that exist in this country. In fact, it’s only likely to exacerbate and amplify them.

Trump Remains a Danger

Trump has already made it clear that he won’t accept any losing outcome. Neither will millions of his followers. For modern Republican Party leaders and their base, election rejection (if they lose) has become an ironclad principle. On the stump, Trump has already begun to emphasize that the spiraling legal cases against him are “election interference,” that the Democrats are putting the pieces in place to steal the election from him, and that the Black judge and prosecutors holding him accountable are “racists.”

As he wrote on one of his social media posts (in caps) those individuals are to him “RIGGERS.” That stable genius’s use of a term that rhymes with a racist slur against Black people was undoubtedly no accident. After all, he spends a considerable amount of his private time branding people. White supremacists wasted hardly a moment in beginning to use the term online, in part, to get around censors on the lookout for explicitly racist terminology.

He is, in other words, already laying the foundation to claim election fraud and creating the basis for another MAGA revolt. While there’s plenty of reason to believe he won’t be able to draw tens of thousands of his supporters to attack the Capitol again, not the least being the Justice Department’s prosecution of hundreds of those who tried it the last time, he’ll certainly have GOP members in Congress ready to resist certifying a Democratic victory.

Trump’s desperation to win is driven not only by the prospect of multiple convictions in his various trials, drawn-out appeals (that are unlikely to be successful), and possible prison time of some sort, but also by the brutal public dismantling of what’s left of his financial empire. 

The civil suit New York Attorney General Letitia James brought against Trump and the Trump organization has already resulted in a devastating judgment by Judge Arthur Engoron. He ruled Trump and his adult sons liable and immediately stripped them of their control over their businesses. Trump may now not only lose all his New York business properties but have to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in restitution. For someone whose whole identity is linked to his purported wealth, there could hardly have been a more crushing blow.

In his mind, a second term as president clearly has little to do with benefiting the country, the Republican Party, or even the rest of his family. It’s his only path to shutting down the two federal cases against him in Florida and Washington, D.C. However, even such a win wouldn’t help him with the election interference case in Georgia or the hush-money criminal case in New York. Convictions in either of those would mean further accountability sooner or later. A second term would undoubtedly offer him another chance to monetize the presidency, just as he did the first time around, in a fashion never before seen.

His record is still being investigated but, according to Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Trump raked in tens of millions of dollars that way. It reports that Trump’s businesses took in more than $160 million from international sources alone, and a grand total of more than $1.6 billion from all sources, during his presidency. As CREW put it: “Trump’s presidency was marred by unprecedented conflicts of interest arising from his decision not to divest from the Trump Organization, with his most egregious conflicts involving businesses in foreign countries with interests in U.S. foreign policy.” 

Trump’s Violence Advocacy Grows

Trump’s legitimate fear of losing is pushing him toward ever more strident and violent language. He’s also signaling to his followers that the use of force to put him in power (or go after those who deny it to him) is all too acceptable. His visit to the Palmetto State Armory gun shop in Summerville, South Carolina, on September 25th was an unambiguous message to them: get ready for war.

There, he admired a Glock pistol and was visibly eager to purchase it. However, he ran into a legal snafu. His spokesperson, Steven Cheung, initially posted a video on social media celebrating Trump’s purchase of the Glock, a special “Trump edition” that had a likeness of him and the words “Trump 45th” etched on it. According to the New York Times, Trump gleefully said, “I want to buy one.”

However, after a staff member apparently realized that no one under federal indictment could legally do so, the post was deleted and a subsequent statement was put up that read, “President Trump did not purchase or take possession of the firearm. He simply indicated that he wanted one.” The store would also have been liable under federal law 18 U.S.C. 922, given that it would have been hard for its proprietors to deny that they knew the former president was under multiple indictments.

That visit was more than just a message to his followers to arm themselves. There are 158 gun stores in South Carolina and yet Trump selected the very one linked to a mass killing of Black people in Florida.

At least one of the guns used in those murders had been purchased at that very gun shop. On August 26, 2023, white supremacist Ryan Christopher Palmeter went to a Dollar General store in Jacksonville, Florida, and murdered three African Americans — Angela Michelle Carr, 52; Jerrald Gallion, 29; and Anolt Joseph Laguerre Jr., 19 — and then killed himself as the police closed in.

The shooter had two guns, a Glock and an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle, one of them from the South Carolina Palmetto State Armory gun store. Palmeter also left behind several racist manifestos.

That carnage occurred just a month before Trump’s visit and his implicit decision to associate himself with that explosion of bigoted violence — like an earlier trip to Waco, Texas, the site of a deadly gunfight between federal law enforcement agents and antigovernment extremists — helped reinforce the idea on the far right that violent force is acceptable for political ends. In his speech at Waco, his first “official” campaign rally for election 2024, Trump stated, “I am your warrior, I am your justice… For those who have been wronged and betrayed… I am your retribution.”

The chaos and disorder likely to follow any Trump loss in 2024 will only be further enhanced if the GOP keeps control of the House of Representatives or wins control of the Senate. A number of congressional Republicans have shown that they will not hesitate to do all they can to put Trump back in the White House, including igniting a constitutional crisis by refusing to certify Electoral College votes.

All that said, Trump losing and sending his supporters into the streets amid tantrums by congressional Republicans and Republican state governors and legislatures would hardly be the worst possible scenario.

After all, if Trump were to win, the extremists in and out of government would immediately be empowered to carry out the most right-wing agenda since the height of the segregationist era. A reelected Trump will find the most loyal (to him) and corruptible cabinet members possible. Their only necessary qualification will be a willingness to follow his orders without hesitation, whether or not they’re legal, ethical, or by any stretch of the imagination good for the country.

Count on one thing: it wouldn’t be an America First but a Trump First and Last administration.

He would undoubtedly engage in a series of personal vendettas with the sort of viciousness and resolve never before seen in Washington. He would take a victory, no matter how marginal or questionable, in the Electoral College as a mandate to attack all his perceived enemies with whatever power his new presidency could muster. He’s also well aware of a Department of Justice policy (of questionable legality) not to prosecute a sitting president, which he’ll interpret as a license of perpetual lawlessness. Trump’s persecution administration would harken back to the worst days of McCarthyism and beyond.

And lest you think that’s the end of the matter, it only gets worse.

Trump Will Have Significantly More Help in a Second Term

Beyond Trump’s individual sociopathic behavior, a far-right agenda is being created that will provide a certain ideological clarity to his bumbling authoritarianism. The policy work, not just from the Trump campaign but from Project 25, should scare everyone. A $22 million initiative by the rightwing Heritage Foundation, Project 25 has already produced a 920-page book, Mandate for Leadership: the Conservative Promise, detailing plans to reshape the federal government. If implemented, its strategy would write “the end” to the classic separation of powers, checks and balances, and even a non-partisan civil service. Every single federal department and agency would instead be restructured to fall under the complete control of the president.

It also offers hundreds of new policies on issues ranging from the environment and labor rights to education and health care. Its underlying assumption: that, post-2024, a conservative president will be in power for some time to come. (If so, Trump will, of course, have the backing of Republicans in Congress, who again may control one or both chambers, and a 6-3 Supreme Court majority.)

Count on this: resistance will be swift, massive, and enduring. Trump and Republican minority rule would not go unchallenged and the repression sure to follow would only generate yet more resistance and, undoubtedly, a generation of political turbulence.

On the other hand, a significant electoral defeat for the Republicans and Trump (along with his conviction on any number of criminal charges) would certainly prove a major obstacle to future authoritarianism. However, tens of millions of his voters will not go quietly into the night, while far-right elected officials in Congress and state legislatures will continue to push extreme conservative policies. White nationalists and radical evangelicals will mobilize as best as they can. Financial and political resources will be available.

The effort to defeat MAGA at all levels and in all ways politically will go on, but progressives need to prepare for the challenge of 2024 and the perilous years to follow.


Related Posts


Please support and visit The Brooks Blackboard's website for more news stories, and my brief bio.

On social media, visit me on 

Facebook: The Brooks Blackboard 

Twitter: @_CharlesBrooks   






Friday, November 10, 2023

Maryland confirmed as pick for new FBI headquarters

By Jennifer Shutt, William J. Ford, Danielle E. Gaines

The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s new headquarters will be in Maryland, a significant victory for the state following years of jockeying against Virginia and debate throughout several presidencies about where best to locate the law enforcement agency.

The General Services Administration picked the Greenbelt site Wednesday over the Springfield, Virginia, and Landover options, according to a source with knowledge confirming the GSA’s decision to Maryland Matters and States Newsroom.

GSA Administrator Robin Carnahan said in a written statement to States Newsroom and Maryland Matters that “GSA looks forward to building the FBI a state-of-the-art headquarters campus in Greenbelt to advance their critical mission for years to come.”

“Thank you to everyone at GSA, DOJ, FBI, Congress, and others who helped reach this important milestone after a comprehensive, multi-year effort,” Carnahan said.

A spokesperson for the federal agency said in a written statement that “GSA determined Greenbelt to be the best site because it was the lowest cost to taxpayers, provided the greatest transportation access to FBI employees and visitors, and gave the government the most certainty on project delivery schedule.

“It also provided the highest potential to advance sustainability and equity,” the spokesperson said.

The Washington Post originally reported the decision.

The Maryland congressional delegation along with several other officials, including Gov. Wes Moore (D) and Prince George’s County Executive Angela Alsobrooks (D) said in a written statement that the decision is a “historic moment” for the FBI and the country.

“Our decades-long, bipartisan effort to bring the Maryland sites’ many merits to the GSA’s attention was never about politics,” they wrote. “It was always about making the case for what is best for the FBI, our region, and the country.”

Virginia Democratic U.S. Sens. Mark Warner and Tim Kaine said in a written statement they’re “deeply disappointed that despite the clear case that Virginia is the best home for the FBI, the Administration went a different direction.”

“We spent years appropriately criticizing the last Administration for politicizing the new FBI headquarters — only for a new Administration to come in and allow politics to taint the selection process,” Warner and Kaine said.

Virginia Democratic U.S. Rep. Gerry Connolly said in a written statement that he was not given a heads-up about the decision.

“In making this decision, GSA has shamelessly caved to political pressure, putting blatant politics over the merits and amending the weighting of long-established criteria to make this decision all but predictable,” Connolly wrote.

“While Virginia’s loss is also the FBI’s, GSA’s reputation for objective procurement free from politics has taken a mortal hit today from which it will struggle to recover for years into the future,” Connolly added.

Congress will still need to provide funding for construction, which is expected to take several years to complete.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation will be moving from its current headquarters on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C. The J. Edgar Hoover building, which opened in 1974, puts the FBI between the White House and the U.S. Capitol on a street that presidents often walk down during their Inauguration parades.

Nearly two decades ago, in 2005, the FBI’s Asset Management Plan indicated the agency would soon need a new headquarters, given the building’s structural and space issues.

Plans progressed slowly during the latter years of the Obama administration, but the Trump administration tried to keep the FBI in its existing location with reports alleging former President Donald Trump didn’t want the site potentially sold to a rival hotel.

Plans to move the FBI headquarters to the suburbs outside of Washington, D.C. began moving forward again during the Biden administration.

The Maryland and Virginia delegations pitched their states to the GSA in March, a provision that was required in a government spending package.


The GSA considered five criteria in picking the new location, including FBI mission requirements, access to transportation, site development flexibility, sustainability and equity, and cost.

FBI mission requirements included the distance to the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia as well as the U.S. Department of Justice in downtown Washington, D.C.

The GSA weighted each of the categories, though it changed that criteria in July.

Proximity to the FBI mission-related locations moved from 35% to 25%, transportation access moved from 25% to 20%, site development flexibility stayed at 15%, sustainability and equity increased from 15% to 20% and cost increased from 10% to 20%.

Maryland officials react

The “Team Maryland” statement from congressional, state and county leaders said the failing infrastructure at the Hoover Building was no longer serving the FBI’s operational needs, “which has undermined our national security.”

“The once fabled building has crumbled before our eyes, with nets surrounding the facility for years to protect pedestrians from falling debris. Today’s decision by the General Services Administration (GSA) will ensure we fulfill the FBI’s dire, longstanding need for a new consolidated headquarters that meets the modern-day demands on the Bureau’s work to protect Americans and our nation,” the statement continued. “…We are committed to doing everything we can to ensure the FBI has the best possible headquarters in the quickest timeframe so that we can facilitate a smooth transition to Prince George’s County. We look forward to building a strong, productive partnership with the Bureau and its staff.”

Alsobrooks held a Zoom press briefing Wednesday night and praised Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-5th) as “a leader” in the long effort. The county executive also said equity played a major part in the GSA’s decision.

For the last 15 years, the county executive said the federal government invested $460 billion in Virginia compared to $120 billion in Prince George’s.


“There’s a huge difference between equity and diversity. Virginia was very confused,” she said. “[Virginia officials talked] about counting heads, how many Black or brown people live in a jurisdiction. When we talked about equity, we’re talking about the investments that were made, how many federal dollars were spent in one jurisdiction versus another.”

She continued: “We know that these investments do yield income and allow for job growth to happen,” Alsobrooks said. “What we were saying is that we wanted to be able to grow our county in our state, and to have this important job center come down to Prince George’s County.”

Del. Jazz Lewis (D-Prince George’s), who was part of Hoyer’s staff between 2014 and 2021, praised his former boss.

“A big congratulations to Congressman Steny Hoyer for quarterbacking this over three presidential administrations, multiple GSA leads and FBI leads at the top of their departments,” Lewis said. “This is the right message to send for equity in the region as far as the placement of facilities. I’m very happy it is landing in gorgeous Prince George’s.”

Greenbelt Mayor Emmett Jordan, who was top vote-getter in Tuesday night’s election, said the city represents the best location that includes being in walking distance of a Metro station.

“We have the capacity to accommodate the project, which would create jobs [and] provide a boost to our local economy and attract retail and commercial businesses to Prince George’s County,” he said. “We’re very excited to hear that the GSA and the FBI have finally made a decision.”

This article originally appeared in the Maryland Matters on November 10th, 2023.  

Related Posts

U.S. House votes to censure Michigan’s Rashida Tlaib over Israel remarks, Michigan Advance


Please support and visit The Brooks Blackboard's website for more news stories, and this link for my brief bio.

On social media, visit me on 

Facebook: The Brooks Blackboard 

Twitter: @_CharlesBrooks   


Michigan GOP senators sponsor resolution calling on Rep. Tlaib to resign

BY: 

The entire Michigan Senate Republican caucus has signed on to a resolution calling for U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Detroit) to resign from office, citing her “hurtful comments” about the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas. 

Introduced by Senate Minority Leader Aric Nesbitt (R-Porter Twp.), and supported by the 17 other Senate GOP members, the resolution asserts that Tlaib responded to the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel by the militant group Hamas “in an insensitive and inappropriate fashion,” noting that she  “refused to condemn Hamas in her initial response” to the attacks and that in the wake of an explosion at a hospital in Gaza hospital, Tlaib “irresponsibly shared Hamas propaganda blaming Israel, despite U.S. intelligence assessments indicating that Israel was not responsible for the blast.”  

It also cites her defense of the “use of the Hamas rallying cry, ‘from the river to the sea,’ which calls for the eradication of the Israeli state and the Jewish people.”

In a press release following the introduction of the resolution, Nesbitt went even further in his condemnation of Tlaib, the only Palestinian-American member of Congress.

“Congresswoman Tlaib has gone well beyond her initial refusal to condemn the Oct. 7 terrorist acts on Israel into openly echoing Hamas catchphrases calling for the eradication of the Jewish state; this is unconscionable for a sitting member of the U.S. House of Representatives,” he said. “She is not fit to serve within the dignified office she holds, and Michigan’s leaders should unite their voices in calling for her resignation. This is not a partisan issue, but an issue of common moral decency.”

The resolution follows Tuesday’s 234-188 vote by the U.S. House of Representatives to censure Tlaib along similar lines, with 22 Democrats joining majority Republicans in approval.

Michigan’s delegation was divided on party lines, with seven Democrats voting against the measure and six Republicans voting for it.

While Tlaib has not returned a request for comment from the Michigan Advance about the resolution for her to resign, she did address her House colleagues in an emotional floor speech Tuesday, insisting she was being targeted for her support of Palestinian causes and advocacy for a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.

“I can’t believe I have to say this, but Palestinian people are not disposable,” she said, her voice cracking. “We are human beings, just like anyone else.”

Hamas’ terrorist attack on Oct. 7 killed more than 1,400 people, mostly civilians. Israel’s counteroffensive has killed more than 10,000 people, according to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry. Most of the dead Palestinians were children, Tlaib said Tuesday.

“Speaking up to save lives, Mr. Chair — no matter faith, no matter ethnicity — should not be controversial in this chamber,” Tlaib continued. “The cries of the Palestinian and Israeli children sound no different to me. What I don’t understand is why the cries of Palestinians sound different to you all. We cannot lose our shared humanity.”

Nesbitt’s resolution was assigned to the Senate Government Operations Committee, the committee where bills are traditionally sent to languish. The Legislature is expected to adjourn for the year on Tuesday.

This article originally appeared in the Michigan Advance on November 10th, 2023.  

Related Posts

U.S. House votes to censure Michigan’s Rashida Tlaib over Israel remarks, Michigan Advance


Please support and visit The Brooks Blackboard's website for more news stories, and this link for my brief bio.

On social media, visit me on 

Facebook: The Brooks Blackboard 

Twitter: @_CharlesBrooks   



U.S. House votes to censure Michigan’s Rashida Tlaib over Israel remarks


The U.S. House voted late Tuesday to censure Rep. Rashida Tlaib for remarks the Michigan Democrat has made about Israel and Palestine amid the ongoing war in the Middle East. The chamber voted, 234-188, to adopt a resolution written by Georgia Republican Rich McCormick that would censure Tlaib, the only Palestinian-American member of Congress, for a handful of statements in the month since the militant group Hamas launched a surprise attack into southern Israel. Twenty-two Democrats voted for the resolution. Michigan’s delegation was split on party lines, with all seven Democrats voting against the measure and all six Republicans voting for it.

The resolution cited Tlaib’s criticism of Israel the day after Hamas’ initial attack, her dissemination of a later-debunked report that Israeli rockets destroyed a hospital in the Gaza Strip and a video last week that included the phrase “from the river to the sea,” which is widely seen as advocating for the dissolution of the state of Israel.

Tlaib has called for a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. Hamas’ attack has killed more than 1,400, mostly civilians. Israel’s counteroffensive has killed more than 10,000, according to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry. Most of the dead Palestinians were children, Tlaib said Tuesday.

In an emotional floor speech Tuesday, Tlaib said she was not antisemitic, but has long criticized the Israeli government. Her House colleagues were targeting her for her support of Palestinian causes and advocacy for a ceasefire, she said.

“I can’t believe I have to say this, but Palestinian people are not disposable,” she said, her voice cracking. “We are human beings, just like anyone else.”

As Tlaib paused to regain her composure, Rep. Ilhan Omar, a Minnesota Democrat who with Tlaib comprised the first two Muslim women elected to Congress, rose in a sign of support and put a hand on Tlaib’s back. Rep. AndrĂ© Carson of Indiana, who is also Muslim, placed a hand on Tlaib’s shoulder.

“Speaking up to save lives, Mr. Chair — no matter faith, no matter ethnicity — should not be controversial in this chamber,” Tlaib continued. “The cries of the Palestinian and Israeli children sound no different to me. What I don’t understand is why the cries of Palestinians sound different to you all. We cannot lose our shared humanity.”

Resolution criticizes Tlaib

The day after Hamas’ surprise attack, Tlaib released a statement mourning “Palestinian and Israeli lives lost” but called Israeli policy “apartheid” that would lead to “resistance.”

The resolution said the language in that statement “justified” the attack.

The resolution also criticized Tlaib for echoing reports that Israeli rockets killed hundreds at a hospital in Gaza. U.S. intelligence later debunked that report, which was initially based on information from Palestinian officials.

The most recent event cited in the resolution was Tlaib’s tweet on Friday showing a video with pro-Palestinian protestors chanting “from the river to the sea.” The slogan, which refers to the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea, is seen as a call to disband the state of Israel and grant the land to the Palestinian people.

In a follow-up tweet Friday, Tlaib called the slogan “an aspirational call for freedom, human rights and peaceful coexistence.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat who is Jewish, led the floor debate against the resolution.

Raskin and Tlaib disagree about aspects of Israel-Palestine relations, but Raskin, a former constitutional law professor, said Tlaib was entitled by the First Amendment to speak her mind.

“The phrase ‘from the river to the sea’ is abhorrent to me, even with her public explanation of what she means by it, which is very different from what Hamas says,” Raskin said. “But I would never think of punishing her or disciplining her because we disagree about that.”

McCormick responded that the resolution had nothing to do with Tlaib’s right to free speech, but was about the House taking a position.

“This is not about a First Amendment issue,” he said. “Rep. Tlaib has the right to spew antisemitic vitriol, even calling for the destruction of the Jewish state. But the House of Representatives also has the right to make it clear that her hate speech does not reflect the opinion of the chamber. And that’s what this resolution is about.”

 Pro-Palestinian rally in Detroit, Oct. 18, 2023 | Violet Klocko

Another resolution

The vote was the second time in as many weeks the House considered a resolution censuring Tlaib. The chamber voted Nov. 1 to quash a similar resolution sponsored by Georgia Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene.

The chamber is scheduled to vote again late Tuesday on another motion to table Greene’s resolution.

The vote last week occurred before Tlaib’s tweets that included “from the river to the sea.”

If the House votes Tuesday to proceed to the Greene resolution, a vote on both that measure and the McCormick resolution are expected Wednesday.


This article originally appeared in the Michigan Advance on November 9th, 2023.  

Related Posts



Please support and visit The Brooks Blackboard's website for more news stories, and this link for my brief bio.

On social media, visit me on 

Facebook: The Brooks Blackboard 

Twitter: @_CharlesBrooks