Mediaboss Marketing

While former President Trump was agitating tooverturn his election defeat, Rep. Greg Pence, R-Ind., the olderbrother of then-Vice President Mike Pence, was spendingmoney at Trump's Washingtonhotel, according to a new filing with the Federal Election Commission. Weeks later, on the day Mike Pence publicly rejected a lawsuit that members of Congress filed against him, the Trump campaign returned a $4,000 donation that hisbrother had made seven months earlier.

According to ayear-end FECreportfiled last weekend, Greg Pence's campaign, which had previously drawn scrutiny forthousands of dollars in apparent personal expenses at Trump's hotel, reported spending $1,551on Dec. 3 for a cateredevent at BLT Prime, theTrump International Hotel's restaurant and a popular hub for conservative allies of the former president. Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the GOP House whip, reported a $1,000 expense at BLT Prime the same evening, for catering and facility rental.

Earlier that day, members of the House Freedom Caucusheld a press conference to call on then-Attorney General Bill Barr to release the results of a Justice Departmentinvestigation into possible election fraud. Thatconference featured Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, who later filed a statement insupport of thedoomedSupreme Court election challenge brought by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, which bothPence and Scalisejoined. (Thatsuit was almost immediately rejected.)

A few weeks later, while Greg Pence mulled the decision of whether to object to the electoral votes, his campaign reported that the Trump campaign hadnever cashed a $4,000 contribution thatPence made in May, seven months earlier, according toFEC filings. The donation does not appear on the Trump campaign's receipts.

Pence ultimately joined three other Indiana Republicans to sidewith the former president andchallenge Pennsylvania's votes hours after rioters had huntedhis younger brother through the Capitol. Pence had also objected to Arizona's votes earlier that day.

Pence later issued a statement saying thathis choices"reflect both my support of the Constitution and the disenfranchised voters of the Sixth District," while declaring that "violence and anarchy is never the answer."

"I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution on behalf of Hoosiers in the Sixth District. The United States is a country of law and order," Pence said in the statement. "There are millions of American voters in our nation who currently feel disenfranchised, but violence and anarchy is never the answer. The way forward for our nation is to follow the U.S. Constitution."

That positiondiverged fromIndiana's two Republican senators,Todd Young and MikeBraun.The latter had originally planned to challenge the electoral count but reversed that decisionafter the insurrection, sayingin a statement on Twitter that the day's violencehad "changed things drastically."

"Though I will continue to push for a thorough investigation into the election irregularities many Hoosiers are concerned with as my objection was intended, I have withdrawn that objection and will vote to get this ugly day behind us," Braun wrote.

It is unclear why Pence did not reverse his original decisionamid widespread reports that the Capitol riotershad specifically targeted his brother for execution, afterTrump's dissatisfactionwith his vice president became widely known.

The Pence family as a whole haschanneled a significantamount of money to the Trumps over the last four years. Between November 2017and early 2019, Greg Pence, who won his brother's formerseat in 2018, made headlines for substantial and frequent expendituresat Trump's Washingtonhotel. Thosepayments, totaling $45,000,includedthousands of dollars in donor funds for personal lodging, an unlawful expense which his campaign later reclassifiedasfundraising events after USA Today exposed the apparent violations.

A Pence spokesperson saidat the timethat the campaign had only made the changes "in order to avoid confusion here from hostile reporters."

Greg Pence did not reply to Salon's request for comment. Mike Pence could not be immediately reached for comment.

The rest is here:
While Trump pressured Mike Pence, his brother Greg was spending money at Trump's hotel again - Salon

After coming out to the American people as un-reelected, Mike Pence was abruptly turned out of his Washington home.

Its not like it was a choice, sobbed Pence, swiping at his eyes. You think I want to be someone who loses an election? Its just who I am! I cant believe they would turn their back on me like this! How can people be so cruel, kicking someone out of their home and job, just because of who they are?!

Without a place to live, Pence and his wife have been roaming the streets of Washington, despondently searching for someone to take them in.

Im sorry, said Jillian Pinkerton, a Washington homeowner. But I just cant let people like that into my good, Christian home. Marriage should be between two consenting adults who love each other, not some repressed weirdo and a woman he calls mother. God said Adam and Spouse, not Mike Pence in my house.

I mean I feel bad for them or whatever, but I just dont want them staying at my place, said Tucker Marks, a local conservative bachelor. I only have one bathroom in this apartment and obviously I need to use it. That bathroom is a mens bathroom. If Karen peed in there it would be gender neutral. And then wed all be going straight to Hell. Is that what you want?

Many Washingtonians witnessed the Pences going door to door to ask for shelter. Both of them were reportedly weeping and carrying a bindle made from the old Oval Office drapes and a big stick.

Look, I get that he didnt choose to lose the election, but does he have to be so open about it? said Kimberly Thomas. Dont get me wrong, I dont hate people who lose elections, but watching it grosses me out. I like lots of election losers. My cousin lost an election once in college! But she had the decency to do that in the privacy of her own home. Why cant the Pences just be more subtle about it?

For now, the Pences are sheltering inside a fort made of tattered Trump flags and discarded MAGA hats. Reportedly, the fort has not been particularly effective at keeping out the elements, but has come in handy every time a rainbow has appeared in the sky, allowing Mike Pence to cower inside to avoid bursting into a ball of flames and fliers advertising for conversion therapy.

Editors Note: This article is purely satirical and fictitious. All attributions in this article are not genuine, and this story should be read in the context of pure entertainment only.

Contact Sarah Lewis at sarahelewis956 at gmail.com

Follow this link:
Mike Pence forced to wander the streets of Washington after coming out as un-reelected - The Stanford Daily

CNNsJake Tapperpredicted that the stunning video montage House Democrats provided duringDonald Trumpssecond impeachment trial would do little to sway Republicans.

Tapper was unconvinced when colleague Dana Bash predicted that Republicans would be impacted by the video evidence, going as far as to question if Republicans would even abandon their support for Trump if violent rioters had reached Mike Pence.

Tapper referenced Sen.Mitch McConnells (R-KY) condemnation of the day, noting that both he and Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) admitted that Trump had some responsibility to bear for the Capitol attack.

Even with that, with dead people, I have to wonder what if the crowd had actually gotten to Mike Pence. What if this had gotten even worse? Tapper asked Bash and Abby Phillip.

Five people killed that day, dozens more maimed from injuries, wounds theyre going to have forever. Three fingers lost, an eye lost, brain damage. What if a member of congress or Vice President Pence, God forbid, had been killed? I honestly dont think that anything would different on the floor of the Senate.

Phillip agreed with Tapper, noting that Republican lawmakers do not seem to be grappling with what happened, and are instead fixated on the idea of reaching unity.

Watch above, via CNN.

Have a tip we should know? [emailprotected]

Here is the original post:
Jake Tapper: Trial Would Be the Same if Mike Pence Was Killed - Mediaite

In the latest stimulus package, Democrats are moving ahead with plans to provide American families with $3,000 per school-aged child over the year next. Although the increase would be temporary, some lawmakers want to see a permanent boost put in place to dramatically reduce child poverty in the U.S.

On Monday night, the House Ways and Means Committee released the details of many of the policies under consideration in the third Covid-19 relief package. That includes a proposal that would institute a fully refundable child tax credit for 2021 and increase the amount to $3,000 per child ages 6 to 17 and $3,600 annually for children under the age of 6.

There's already a child tax credit in place that provides $2,000 per child for 2020. When Americans file their taxes, they can claim the credit for children under 17. The current credit is income-based, so those making over $200,000 ($400,000 for married couples filing jointly) will see the amount of their credit gradually phased out. If taxpayers' credit exceeds their taxes owed, they can get up to $1,400 as a refund.

The Democrats' new proposal would increase the credit amount by $1,000 ($1,600 for those with children under 6) and allow taxpayers to receive the full amount as a refund. Additionally, the plan would make the credit payable in monthly installments of $250 and $300, respectively, rather than just once a year. The payments would start to phase out for individuals earning more than $75,000 a year or $150,000 for those married filing jointly.

If passed, the Treasury Department could issue advance payments of up to half the 2021 child tax credit starting in July based on families' 2019 or 2020 tax return information. If there is any overpayment of the credit, individuals making less than $40,000 ($60,000 for couples filing jointly) will not need to repay the amount, nor will it be garnished from wages.

"It is an historic proposal in terms of lowering child poverty," says Chuck Marr, director of federal tax policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. But it's only a temporary increase. If it were to become permanent, it would be a "landmark achievement," he says.

Some Democrats are proposing to permanently increase to the child tax credit. Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.) and Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) re-introduced the American Family Act on Monday, which would permanently increase the child tax credit by $1,000 per child ages 6 to 18 and $1,600 for children under 6. The credit, like the proposed language in the relief bill, would be paid monthly.

The American Family Act also provides the benefit for higher-income earners. Individuals who earn up to $150,000 and married couples filing jointly who earn up to $200,000 can qualify. Additionally, the bill proposes indexing the credit to inflation so that it will not be diminished over time.

Currently, the combination of the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit, which subsidizes low-income working families, lifts 5.5 million children out of poverty a year, Marr tells CNBC Make It. A permanent $3,000 child tax credit would lift an additional 4.1 million children above the poverty line, he estimates. "It's not quite doubling, but it's really a similar order of magnitude," Marr says.

DeLauro's office projects that the increase to the child tax credit, if implemented on a permanent basis and with a higher income cap as she has proposed, would cut overall childhood poverty by 45% in the U.S.

"The inclusion of an expansion and improvement of the child tax credit in coronavirus rescue legislation moving in the House this week is groundbreaking, but we cannot stop there," DeLauro says. "We must use this moment to pass the American Family Act and permanently expand and improve the child tax credit by increasing the benefit to families and providing payments monthly. Children and families must be able to count on this benefit long after the end of this pandemic."

Senator Mitt Romney proposed a similar increase to the child tax credit last week, but created a permanent increase of $3,000 a year per child for school-aged children and $4,200 per child under 6.

In order to fund the new child assistance, Romney's proposal would reduce the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit (CDCTC) and eliminate Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, the State and Local Tax Deduction (SALT) and the head-of-household tax filing status, as well as several other credits for children and families.

The Democrats' legislative proposal, meanwhile, would not eliminate any existing child or family programs, but instead add as much as $120 billion to the federal deficit to cover the cost.

Marr says that while Romney's plan proposes a higher payment for younger children, it's "completely counterproductive" because it then claws back two-thirds of those gains by eliminating other credits that work in tandem for families.A lot of these family assistance programs work in concert with others to help low-income families, Marr says.

Check out:Mitt Romney proposes giving American families an extra $3,000 a year

Don't miss:Here are the 5 best personal loans of December 2020

See the rest here:
Democrats push forward with temporary $3,000 child tax credit, but some want to make increase permanent - CNBC

By Se-Anne Rall 8h ago

Share this article:

DURBAN: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" - it appears the ancient proverb rang true for two political heavyweights, former president Jacob Zuma and commander-in-chief of the EFF, Julius Malema, who met "for tea" last week.

And who is their common enemy? It could very well be President Cyril Ramaphosa.

On Friday, Malema flew to Zuma's homestead in Nkandla in KwaZulu-Natal. The visit was preceded by an exchange on Twitter where @Julius_Sello_Malema tweeted @PresJGZuma: "can we please have tea urgently?" @PresJGZuma then responded: "Thobela Moshabi. I have seen your request to share a cup of tea. As you know, Nkandla village is home for me and that is where my time is spent these days. Tea I have plenty of, you are more than welcome to come over for a cup."

Political analyst Dr Ntsikelelo Breakfast said while Malema had said much about Zuma in the past, there was a common denominator between the two - Ramaphosa and public enterprises minister Pravin Gordhan.

"Zuma has not forgotten the past and had it not been for Zuma, Malema would not have been removed from the ANCYL. However, Ramaphosa and Pravin Gordhan remain the common denominator between the two. They will put their differences aside," he said.

Breakfast said the question to be asked now was, does this pose a threat to South Africa, and should Ramaphosa be concerned?

He said it was not easy for Zuma to now be out of power and there was a push for the forces of radical economic transformation to bounce back into power.

"If this happens, the charges against Zuma will never be pursued. This could be a strategy where they will collaborate and use Parliament as their battleground. However, Covid-19 could save Ramaphosa as due to safety protocols, Parliament has not had a sitting," he said.

Breakfast said he believed that the meeting between Zuma and Malema was not a spontaneous one.

"This (arrangements for meeting) could have been happening in private, and when it was shared on social media, the media went overboard and played into Zuma and Malema's hands. This can be seen as psychological warfare," Breakfast said.

Meanwhile, professor of political studies at the University of the Witwatersrand, Lawrence Hamilton, dismissed the tea party as nothing more than a publicity stunt.

He added that it proved how Malema is capable of blowing whichever way the wind blows".

Hamilton said it could also been seen as Malema using the opportunity to garner support in KZN, a province he has little support in.

"We could just look it as a cabal of corrupt politicians having tea," Hamilton said.

IOL

See original here:
Nkandla tea party: Common foes brought Zuma and Malema together, says analyst - IOL