The Sky is Always Falling with the Democrats if they can't waste Money

Energy and Commerce Committee approves rollbacks for Biden energy programs

The GOP megabill would claw back unspent funds from Democrats’ climate law and speed permitting for fossil fuel projects.

James Bikales 05/14/2025, 5:49am ET

The House Energy and Commerce Committee on Tuesday night approved key portions of the GOP megabill central to President Donald Trump’s domestic agenda, clawing back billions of dollars in unspent funds from the Democrats’ 2022 climate law and speeding up permitting for fossil fuel projects.

The energy and environment subtitles of the panel’s draft bill represent just a small fraction of the spending cuts Energy and Commerce expects to achieve through its contribution to the Republican party-line package, most of which will come from highly controversial changes to Medicaid.

But Democrats still fiercely pushed back on the Republican energy provisions they said would raise energy prices by repealing popular Inflation Reduction Act programs and allow highly polluting industries to skip portions of the federal permitting process.

“We’re considering a reconciliation bill that picks winners and losers, and elevates expensive, outdated and inefficient sources like coal over cheap, American-made energy like solar, wind and storage,” said Rep. Scott Peters (D-Calif.).

Committee Republicans defeated three amendments to the energy subtitle proposed by Democrats that would have ordered a study on the bill’s impact on energy costs, required the Energy Department’s inspector general to certify the permitting provisions would not increase corruption and forced the Energy secretary to certify tariffs on energy imports were lower than they were before the Trump administration took office.

Democrats particularly objected to portions of the bill that would allow fossil fuel developers to pay a fee to have their projects deemed in the public interest, which they termed a “pay-to-play” scheme.

“I do believe that it’s important that we discuss permitting reform, but to allow all of this to be bypassed completely is profoundly dangerous,” said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).

Rep. Lizzie Fletcher (D-Texas) predicted fossil fuel companies would not take advantage of the program. “You know this is headed to the courts, you know there’s a huge litigation risk here,” she said.

Republicans pushed back, saying that projects would still need to undergo full permitting processes through other agencies and compared the proposal to the user fees pharmaceutical companies pay to the Food and Drug Administration to review their products.

The debate on the environment subtitle, meanwhile, largely focused on the rescissions of unobligated IRA funds from a range of grant and loan programs at the Energy Department and Environmental Protection Agency.

That includes programs, such as EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, from which the Trump administration has attempted to freeze or rescind already obligated funds. Courts have so far ruled many of those efforts unlawful.

Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.), who chairs the Environment subcommittee, insisted that the bill would only affect unobligated funds and was distinct from any actions that “may or may not be going on in the administration.” But Rep. Troy Carter (D-La.) said it was “disingenuous” for Republicans to argue that awarded funds would not be impacted by their actions.

“Would you be willing to say that to the Trump administration, who is cutting money that this Congress has appropriated all over the country?” Carter said.

Republicans have not released information on how much money they expect to claw back from each of the programs, though fullcommittee chair Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) initially pegged the total rescissions from the IRA at $6.5 billion. Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) said the unobligated funds from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund amounted to just $19 million for “basic administrative functions.”

The GOP bill would also delay implementation of the IRA’s methane fee for oil and gas companies by 10 years and repeal two Biden administration rules aimed at speeding adoption of electric vehicles.

https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/05/14/congress/energy-and-commerce-approves-ira-rollbacks-in-reconciliation-package-00347377

Media Champion Alleged Gangbanger Accused Of Bringing Loaded Gun To A Bronx School

By: Beth Brelje May 13, 2025

The propaganda press tried to pluck at readers’ heartstrings in its storytelling of poor Merwil Alberto Gutierrez Flores, a 19-year-old Venezuelan man the Trump administration deported to Cecot Prison in El Salvador. Flores, an illegal alien from Venezuela, was sent to prison by airplane along with 237 other illegal immigrantsafter ICE “kidnapped,” the “teen” with “no criminal record,” as Charisma Madarang reported for Rolling Stone.

Technically, 19 is still a teenager, but a person is a legal adult at 18. The calculated choice of “teen” in the headline leads readers to assume Flores was a vulnerable child. He is not. He was arrested on weapons charges by New York Police before ICE picked him up.

According to Madarang’s report, ICE arrested Flores on Feb. 24 while he was standing near his Bronx, New York, apartment building with two friends who were also arrested.

His family toldNewsweek’s U.K.-based immigration reporter Billal Rahman, that Flores had no criminal record and ICE was not looking for him but decided to arrest him anyway. (Are his parents here legally?)

A random arrest!Could you be next? Does that not strike fear in your heart, dear reader? That is the headspace propaganda press wants you in.

But honestly, does this story sound plausible? Is the Trump administration just rounding up people without cause now? Of course not.

The truth makes a lot more sense, and the truth had yet to come to light when these and other similar stories were written and repeated. ICE only recently released some of Flores’s records.But having only half the story didn’t stop the propaganda. The previous reports came from immigration reporters looking for a good story, as told by a distraught family member, with no documentation to back it up.

According to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) deportation records, Flores was accused of some troubling crimes the day FBI agents and New York City Police officers arrested him and later turned him over to ICE.

On Feb. 24, 2025, when the FBI and NYPD arrested Floresauthorities charged him withcriminal possession of aloaded firearm; possession of aloaded firearm on school grounds; criminal possession ofstolen property relating to firearms; and possession of “certainammunitionfeeding devices.”

The DHS records say Flores had $2 on him when arrested and he had no tattoos. He reportedly indicated he had no family and said he was not affiliated with a gang; but the records say the latter claim is not true.

“Subject has beenidentified as a[n] Associate/Active of Tren de Aragua,” the papers say, with a redacted list of records checked.

Flores entered the U.S. illegallyy near Paso Del Norte, Texas, onJune 21, 2023, and Border Patrol arrested him. That was his first crime, although the propaganda press tends to overlook that one. He entered when he was 18, and Border Patrol put him in “240 proceedings,” meaning a judge would decide if he could stay in the United States.

Under former President Joe Biden mass immigration policies, Flores could have stayed in the U.S. until his scheduled hearing with an immigration judge on Feb. 1, 2027, DHS records show.

https://thefederalist.com/2025/05/13/media-champion-alleged-gangbanger-accused-of-bringing-loaded-gun-to-a-bronx-school/

Will reporters ever be held accountable for lying to the public over and over for violent gang members, radicals and killers, especially when someone innocent get’s killed for protesting to get gang members out of jail, or the public is not aware of how violent and vicious they are? PS: Tish James should hang low and shut to fuck up! The left only wants to prosecute "violent white men like Daniel Penny", the color of their skin matters if they are guilty or innocent, don’t you know?

Federal Judge Rules Against Student Who Wore A "Let's Go Brandon" Shirt 1/2

Tyler Durden Wednesday, May 14, 2025 PM Authored by Jonathan Turley,

We previously discussed how schools were making students remove sweatshirts reading “Let’s Go Brandon.”I have argued that the shirts should be treated as protected speech.

However, United States District CourtJudge Christopher Boyko just delivered another blow to free speech in rejecting a claim for such protection, at least as the basis for injunctive relief, in Conrad v. Madison Local School Dist—Bd. of Ed.

In the prior Michigan case with the sweater shown below, Judge Paul Maloney in D.A. v. Tri County Area Schools (W.D. Mich.) ruled that a “Let’s Go Brandon” T-shirt could be the basis for punishment:

A school can certainly prohibit students from wearing a shirt displaying the phrase F Joe Biden. Plaintiffs concede this conclusion. Plaintiff must make this concession as the Supreme Court said as much in Fraser … (“As cogently expressed by Judge Newman, ‘the First Amendment gives a high school student the classroom right to wear Tinker’s armband, but not Cohen’s jacket [which read {F the Draft}].'”) The relevant four-letter word is a swear word and would be considered vulgar and profane. The Sixth Circuit has written that “it has long been held that despite the sanctity of the First Amendment, speech that is vulgar or profane is not entitled to absolute constitutional protection.” …

If schools can prohibit students from wearing apparel that contains profanity, schools can also prohibit students from wearing apparel that can reasonably be interpreted as profane. Removing a few letters from the profane word or replacing letters with symbols would not render the message acceptable in a school setting. School administrators could prohibit a shirt that reads “F#% Joe Biden.” School officials have restricted student from wearing shirts that use homophones for profane words … [such as] “Somebody Went to HOOVER DAM And All I Got Was This ‘DAM’ Shirt.” … [Defendants] recalled speaking to one student who was wearing a hat that said “Fet’s Luck” … [and asking] a student to change out of a hoodie that displayed the words “Uranus Liquor” because the message was lewd. School officials could likely prohibit students from wearing concert shirts from the music duo LMFAO (Laughing My Fing A Off) or apparel displaying “AITA?” (Am I the A**hole?)…. Courts too have recognized how seemingly innocuous phrases may convey profane messages. A county court in San Diego, California referred an attorney to the State Bar when counsel, during a hearing, twice directed the phrase “See You Next Tuesday” toward two female attorneys.

Again, I strongly disagreed with that decision. However, it has now been replicated in Ohio.

In his complaint, C.C. details how he was wearing a shirt with the phrase “Let’s Go Brandon” on November 25, 2024, underneath a flannel shirt.

He alleges that teacher (and registered Democrat) Krista Ferini was bothered after spotting the shirt and ordered him to “button that up. I know what that means.”

C.C. did so, but later, he was in a classroom that lacked air conditioning, so he took off his flannel shirt. That is when allegedly Ferini proceeded to write him up for the infraction. Principal Andrew Keeple then instructed C.C. to wear the flannel the rest of the day and never to wear the shirt to school again.

C.C. defied that order and wore the shirt again in January of 2025.

While no one else complained, Ferini was reportedly irate and again wrote up C.C. Keeple declared that C.C. had once again violated the school’s dress code and that the shirt constituted a vulgar expression even though it contained no vulgar terms. He stated that further discipline would follow if C.C. continued to wear the shirt.

On March 24, 2025, C.C. wore the t-shirt again.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/federal-judge-rules-against-student-who-wore-lets-go-brandon-shirt

>>23033459

2/2

While no one complained, he received a detention from Keeple. C.C. was disciplined on two other occasions for wearing the shirt.

The court ruled:

“While this case presents serious questions of student free speech versus a school’s interest in protecting students from vulgar and profane speech, the Court finds Plaintiff has not met his high burden to show a substantial likelihood of success on the merits by clear and convincing evidence. While the D.A. case was on summary judgment and presented facts that are different than those before this Court, Defendant’s burden on summary judgment was a preponderance standard which is a lesser burden than Plaintiff’s here. Moreover, that case presented fact issues going to the reasonableness of the school’s interpretation. Here, as Defendants point out, Plaintiff acknowledges in his Verified Complaint that “Let’s Go Brandon” is a euphemism

for F*#% Joe Biden.

“In school speech cases where a school limits or restricts a student’s expression, courts must determine whether the school’s interpretation of the expression is reasonable.”

“The student’s expression must be considered in the proper context but the student’s motivation or subjective intent is irrelevant.”

Given the strong interests of both sides, the unique characteristics of speech in a school setting, the finding by at least one court in this circuit that the school’s interpretation of the phrase as vulgar was reasonable, and the acknowledgment in this case by Plaintiff that the phrase is a vulgar euphemism, the Court finds Plaintiff has not shown a substantial likelihood of success on the merits to support injunctive relief. This does not mean Plaintiff cannot win on the merits of the claim as discovery will likely provide clearer evidence on the reasonableness of the interpretation. But given the high standard for injunctive relief, the Court finds against Plaintiff….”

“Let’s Go Brandon!” has become a similarly unintended political battle cry not just against Biden but also against the bias of the media. It derives from an Oct. 2 interview with race-car driver Brandon Brown after he won his first NASCAR Xfinity Series race. During the interview, NBC reporter Kelli Stavast’s questions were drowned out by loud-and-clear chants of “F*** Joe Biden.” Stavast quickly and inexplicably declared, “You can hear the chants from the crowd, ‘Let’s go, Brandon!’”

“Let’s Go Brandon!” instantly became a type of “Yankee Doodling” of the political and media establishment.

This teacher was clearly put out over the political messaging of the shirt. However, we should encourage students to be politically aware and expressive. Moreover, if schools are allowed to extrapolate profane meaning from non-profane language, it is hard to see the limits on such censorship.

So what if students now wear “Let’s Go Krista” shirts? How many degrees of removal will negate the profane imputation. Does that mean that the use of “let’s go” in any shirt is now prohibited?

C.C. and his family should continue to litigate and, if necessary, appeal this worthy case in the interests of free speech for all students.

• • *

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/federal-judge-rules-against-student-who-wore-lets-go-brandon-shirt

I wonder if he has is fund raising for his court cases, I’d contribute, because schools and colleges are where Free Speech eventually ends

>>23033512

The Jews are really upset that Trump is engaging with middle eastern muslims. BiBi really hates Trump anyway.