Connect with us

Politics

Navy Dr. Ronny Jackson Withdrawing From V.A. Secretary Nomination Another Example of a Smear Campaign

Published

on

(Via AP)

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s White House doctor reluctantly withdrew his nomination to be Veterans Affairs secretary Thursday in the face of accusations of misconduct, the latest embarrassing episode highlighting Trump’s struggles to fill key jobs and the perils of his occasional spur-of-the-moment-decision-making.

The weeks-long saga surrounding the nomination of Navy Dr. Ronny Jackson leaves the government’s second-largest agency without a permanent leader while it faces an immediate crisis with its private health care program. And it abruptly tarnished the reputation of a doctor beloved by two presidents and their staffs.

White House officials say they are taking a new look at the way nominees’ backgrounds are checked – and they believe they will persuade Trump to take additional time to ensure that a replacement is sufficiently vetted.

The leading person now under consideration for the VA post is former Rep. Jeff Miller, who chaired the House Veterans Affairs Committee before retiring last year, according to White House officials. Miller is a strong proponent of expanding private care for veterans, a Trump priority.

Trump quickly selected Jackson, a rear admiral in the Navy, to head the VA last month after firing Obama appointee David Shulkin following accusations of ethical problems and a mounting rebellion within the agency. Jackson, a surprise choice who has worked as a White House physician since 2006, faced immediate questions from Republican and Democratic lawmakers as well as veterans groups about whether he had the experience to manage the massive department of 360,000 employees serving 9 million veterans.

Then this week’s unconfirmed allegations by current and former colleagues about drunkenness and improper prescribing of controlled substances, compiled and released by Democrats, made the nomination all but unsalvageable.

“The allegations against me are completely false and fabricated,” Jackson said in a statement announcing his withdrawal.

Press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Jackson was back at work at the White House on Thursday. But his future there remains uncertain. He had stepped aside from directing Trump’s medical care and leading the medical unit while his nomination was being considered.

“I would hope the White House would closely consider whether he is the best person to provide medical care for the president,” said Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware.

Trump himself praised Jackson, saying, “He’s a great man, and he got treated very, very unfairly.” Then the president went after Democratic Sen. Jon Tester of Montana, who released a list of allegations against Jackson that was compiled by the Democratic staff of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee.

Trump aides said the president was furious with Tester, who faces a tough re-election fight this fall, and plans to aggressively campaign against him.

“I think Jon Tester has to have a big price to pay in Montana,” Trump warned on “Fox & Friends” on TV.

Tester, meanwhile, called on Congress to continue its investigation of Jackson. “I want to thank the service members who bravely spoke out over the past week. It is my constitutional responsibility to make sure the veterans of this nation get a strong, thoroughly vetted leader who will fight for them,” he said.

Elsewhere in the capital, Congress was questioning another Trump official whose job appears in jeopardy.

Scott Pruitt, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, was questioned closely by House Democrats about revelations of unusual security spending, first-class flights, an advantageous condo lease and more. Even Republicans who support Pruitt’s deregulation efforts, said his conduct needed scrutiny.

Full Article

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Immigration

Majority of Americans Support Mass Deportation – CBS Poll

Published

on

In a recent CBS poll, it has been found that 62% of Americans support the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants from the United States. This result reflects the growing public sentiment in favor of stricter immigration policies and the enforcement of existing laws.

The poll, conducted by CBS, surveyed a diverse group of American citizens to gauge their opinions on various issues related to immigration. The findings indicate a significant shift in public opinion, with a majority of respondents expressing their support for the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants.

The results of the poll are not entirely surprising, given the ongoing debates and discussions surrounding immigration reform in the United States. Many Americans believe that the current immigration system is flawed and that stricter measures are necessary to address the issue of illegal immigration.

Proponents of mass deportation argue that it is a necessary step to protect the country’s borders and ensure the safety and security of American citizens. They believe that undocumented immigrants pose a threat to the nation’s economy, social services, and national security.

However, critics of mass deportation argue that it is an inhumane and impractical solution to the problem of illegal immigration. They point out that many undocumented immigrants have lived in the United States for years, contributing to their communities and the economy. Mass deportation, they argue, would result in the separation of families and would be detrimental to the well-being of those affected.

The findings of the CBS poll are likely to fuel further discussions and debates on immigration reform in the United States. As the issue continues to be a contentious topic, it remains to be seen how policymakers will respond to the growing public support for mass deportation of undocumented immigrants.

In conclusion, the recent CBS poll indicates that a majority of Americans support the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants. This finding reflects the growing public sentiment in favor of stricter immigration policies and the enforcement of existing laws. As the debate on immigration reform continues, it is crucial for policymakers to consider the diverse perspectives and opinions of the American people in order to find a balanced and effective solution to the issue of illegal immigration.

Continue Reading

Health

mRNA COVID-19 Injections Not Vaccines – Ninth Circuit Rules

Published

on

In a recent decision that has stirred up discussions across the nation, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the COVID-19 mRNA injections do not qualify as vaccines under traditional medical definitions. This decision was made in a lawsuit brought by the Health Freedom Defense Fund and other plaintiffs against the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). The court’s decision could potentially expose pharmaceutical companies to future liability lawsuits, as it challenges the legal protections typically afforded to vaccine manufacturers.

The lawsuit against LAUSD was based on the claim that the district’s vaccine mandate infringed upon the plaintiffs’ fundamental right to refuse medical treatment. The court, in a majority opinion authored by Circuit Judge R. Nelson and supported by Judge Collins, asserted that the mRNA shots, marketed as vaccines, do not effectively prevent the transmission of COVID-19 but merely reduce symptoms in those who contract the virus. This distinction, the court argued, means that the injections should not be considered vaccines under traditional medical definitions.

The implications of this ruling are significant. If mRNA injections are not considered vaccines, then they may not be subject to the same legal protections as traditional vaccines. This could potentially open the door to liability lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies that have produced and distributed the injections.

The court’s decision has sparked a range of reactions on social media. Some users have expressed relief and support for the ruling, viewing it as a step towards greater transparency and accountability in the handling of the pandemic. Others have criticized the decision, arguing that it undermines public health efforts and could discourage the use of potentially life-saving treatments.

The ruling has also reignited debates about the handling of the pandemic and the promotion of alternative treatments. Some have questioned the effectiveness of the mRNA injections, while others have pointed to the rapid development and deployment of these treatments as a remarkable achievement in the face of a global crisis.

As the legal implications of this ruling continue to unfold, it is likely that the debate surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic and the role of vaccines in public health will continue to evolve. The Ninth Circuit’s decision serves as a reminder of the complex legal and ethical issues at the heart of public health policy.

Continue Reading

Politics

President Trump: No More Tip Taxes!

Published

on

In a recent rally in Las Vegas, former President Donald Trump announced his intention to eliminate taxes on tips for service industry workers if he were to be re-elected. This proposal, which would allow workers to keep their entire tip amount without taxation, has been met with enthusiasm and support from many Americans, particularly those in the service industry.

Trump’s pledge to abolish tip taxes is a bold move that could have a significant impact on the lives of millions of Americans. Service industry workers, including those in restaurants and hospitality, often rely heavily on tips as a significant portion of their income. These workers are typically not highly paid and often face financial instability. By promising to eliminate taxes on tips, Trump is positioning himself as an advocate for the working class, addressing a specific economic concern that directly affects their livelihoods.

The proposal also touches on broader debates about tax policy and economic inequality. While the elimination of taxes on tips could be seen as a populist move to help the working class, it also raises questions about the fairness of the tax system and the distribution of the tax burden. However, Trump’s pledge is a clear indication of his commitment to supporting American workers and addressing the economic challenges they face.

Critics argue that while the policy may benefit service industry workers, it could also lead to unintended consequences, such as encouraging employers to shift more of their employees’ compensation to tips, potentially leading to reduced wages. However, these concerns should not overshadow the potential benefits of Trump’s proposal.

In conclusion, Trump’s pledge to abolish tip taxes is a bold move that could have a significant impact on the lives of millions of Americans. By addressing a specific economic concern that directly affects the livelihoods of service industry workers, Trump is demonstrating his commitment to supporting American workers and addressing the economic challenges they face. While there are concerns about potential unintended consequences, the potential benefits of this proposal should not be overlooked. Trump’s pledge to abolish tip taxes is a clear indication of his commitment to making America great again for all Americans.

Continue Reading

Trending

Donate to Populist Wire

*Note: Every donation is greatly appreciated, regardless of the amount.