The proposal, coming as Russia masses troops on the border with Ukraine, was directed at the United States and Ukraine’s other Western allies.
Russia demanded on Friday that the United States and its allies halt all military activity in Eastern Europe and Central Asia in a sweeping proposal that would establish a Cold War-like security arrangement, a goal that is unlikely to be realized but poses a challenge to diplomatic efforts to defuse a military standoff along Russia’s border with Ukraine. …
The Russian proposal came in the form of a draft treaty suggesting NATO should offer written guarantees that it would not expand farther east toward Russia and halt all military activities in a vast swath of territory where Russia once held sway, from Eastern Europe to Central Asia.
Russia’s deputy foreign minister, Sergei A. Ryabkov, laid out details about the proposal in public for the first time on Friday in a video news conference in Moscow, amid a Russian troop buildup near Ukraine’s border that Western officials have interpreted as a threat of an invasion.
The demands went far beyond the current conflict between Ukrainian government forces and Russia-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine. And most were directed not at Ukraine, which is threatened by the troop buildup, but at the United States and Ukraine’s other Western allies.
They included a request for a NATO commitment that it would not offer membership to Ukraine specifically. But NATO countries are unlikely to formally rule out future membership for Eastern European countries.
The proposal highlighted starkly differing views in the United States and Russia on the military tensions over Ukraine. Russia has insisted that the West has been fomenting the crisis by instilling anti-Russia sentiment in Ukraine, and by providing weapons. Mr. Ryabkov cast the confrontation in Ukraine as a critical threat to Russia’s security.
The United States and European allies, in contrast, say Russia provoked the security crisis by recently deploying tens of thousands of troops near Ukraine’s border. …
… In what could be the ultimate trolling of Democrats, some prominent Trump allies are suggesting House Republicans should elect him speaker if they hold the majority, a move that would place him second to the vice president in the line of succession for the presidency and allow him to preside over a chamber that an angry mob of supporters tried to forcibly enter during the deadly Jan. 6 insurrection. Trump has fueled the speaker idea by suggesting he’s interested. …
“It’s hard to imagine a more self-destructive thing for the House of Representatives to do than to elect a twice-impeached, deeply unprincipled, psychologically unstable, emotionally immature, and manifestly corrupt private citizen like former president Trump to the position of speaker of the House,” Laurence H. Tribe, an emeritus Harvard Law professor and constitutional scholar, said in an e-mail. “But the Constitution doesn’t rule out novel actions just because they’re self-destructive, unprecedented, and obviously stupid.” …
… some Republicans are worried the issue could be used to boost Democratic candidates next year. One group, the Renew America Movement, a coalition of Republicans and independents opposed to political extremism, recently used the specter of Trump as speaker to urge the reelection of moderate Democrats in swing districts. …
(All the Constitution says on this is ‘members of the House shall choose their Speaker.’
Speculation is that Trump would not be up to the job really, but would accept it for a few months, long enough to sit behind Joe Biden at the State of the Union address and smirk.)
Globe: … probably not what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote the Constitution. But, for whatever reason, they left the qualifications for the position of speaker unstated. Article 1, section 2 simply reads, “The House of Representatives shall chuse (sic) their Speaker and other Officers.” …
Press Secretary Jen Psaki: Senator Manchin’s comments this morning on FOX are at odds with his discussions this week with the President, with White House staff, and with his own public utterances. Weeks ago, Senator Manchin committed to the President, at his home in Wilmington, to support the Build Back Better framework that the President then subsequently announced. Senator Manchin pledged repeatedly to negotiate on finalizing that framework “in good faith.”
On Tuesday of this week, Senator Manchin came to the White House and submitted—to the President, in person, directly—a written outline for a Build Back Better bill that was the same size and scope as the President’s framework, and covered many of the same priorities. While that framework was missing key priorities, we believed it could lead to a compromise acceptable to all. Senator Manchin promised to continue conversations in the days ahead, and to work with us to reach that common ground. If his comments on FOX and written statement indicate an end to that effort, they represent a sudden and inexplicable reversal in his position, and a breach of his commitments to the President and the Senator’s colleagues in the House and Senate. …
“I cannot vote to continue with this piece of legislation,” the centrist West Virginia senator said on “Fox News Sunday,” citing concerns about adding to the national debt.
Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, said on Sunday that he could not support President Biden’s signature $2.2 trillion social safety net, climate and tax bill, dooming his party’s drive to pass its marquee domestic policy legislation as written.
The comments from Mr. Manchin, a longtime centrist holdout, dealt the latest and perhaps a fatal blow to the centerpiece of Mr. Biden’s domestic agenda, barely a day after senators left Washington for the remainder of the year after Democrats conceded they could not yet push through any of their top legislative priorities, from the social policy bill to a voting rights overhaul. …
Senator Manchin’s comments this morning on FOX are at odds with his discussions this week with the President, with White House staff, and with his own public utterances. Weeks ago, Senator Manchin committed to the President, at his home in Wilmington, to support the Build Back Better framework that the President then subsequently announced. Senator Manchin pledged repeatedly to negotiate on finalizing that framework “in good faith.” …
(A) political advocacy group backed by billionaire Charles Koch has been pressuring Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., to oppose key parts of the Democratic agenda …
Americans for Prosperity launched a website titled West Virginia Values, which calls on people to email Manchin “to be The Voice West Virginia Needs In D.C. — Reject Washington’s Partisan Agenda.” …
(It leans very heavily on Manchin to depart from the Dem agenda.)
… Democrats and White House officials believe there is still a chance to recast the bill to suit Mr. Manchin’s demands, and to possibly pass it in the first months of next year.
Such an effort would start with responding to the concerns Mr. Manchin has long expressed, including dropping some spending efforts in order to focus on a smaller list of programs that would last a full decade and be paid for largely by raising taxes on high earners and large corporations.
That would force the White House to make difficult choices about which party priorities to leave on the cutting room floor — a decision that would undoubtedly anger progressive Democratic lawmakers and many of those who voted for Mr. Biden, …
Senator Joe Manchin III, the West Virginia Democrat, effectively killed President Biden’s signature domestic policy bill in its current form on Sunday, saying he was convinced the spending and tax cuts in the $2.2 trillion legislation will exacerbate already hot inflation.
Economic evidence strongly suggests Mr. Manchin is wrong. A host of economists and independent analyses have concluded that the bill is not economic stimulus, and that it will not pump enough money into consumer pocketbooks next year to raise prices more than a modest amount. …
Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader, vowed on Monday to press forward with votes on a revised version of President Biden’s $2.2 trillion marquee climate, tax and spending plan, less than a day after a Democratic holdout in the Senate announced he could not support the legislation as written. …
(Meanwhile, the stock market continues to plummet.)
The announcement, which the White House and progressives blasted as a betrayal, is the latest obstacle for a president who promised to break the legislativelogjam inWashington and boost the recovering economy with a series of major bills to “build back better” from the devastation of the pandemic. It comes amid a surge in new COVID cases and persistent inflation that has soured voters on his administration. It also hurts the president’s oft-touted image as a seasoned dealmaker.
“This is about Joe Manchin obstructing the president’s agenda, obstructing the people’s agenda, torpedoing our opportunity to advance unprecedented advancements, to address the hurt that this pandemic-induced recession has caused, and to get this pandemic under control,” said Representative Ayanna Pressley of Boston.
Democrats need every vote in the Senate to pass the most expensive piece of Biden’s agenda, the Build Back Better Act, because of unanimous Republican opposition. Now, party leaders are left scrambling to find another way to advance their key priorities, either putting them into narrower bills that would need bipartisan support to pass — something that seems unlikely — or by negotiating with Manchin on a slimmer package. …
Russia Lays Out Demands for a Sweeping New Security Deal With NATO
Could Donald Trump really be the next House speaker?
(All the Constitution says on this is ‘members of the House shall choose their Speaker.’
Speculation is that Trump would not be up to the job really, but would accept it for a few months, long enough to sit behind Joe Biden at the State of the Union address and smirk.)
Globe: … probably not what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote the Constitution. But, for whatever reason, they left the qualifications for the position of speaker unstated. Article 1, section 2 simply reads, “The House of Representatives shall chuse (sic) their Speaker and other Officers.” …
White House accuses Senator Joe Manchin of breaking commitments on $2 trillion bill, calls his opposition ‘sudden and inexplicable’
Press Secretary Jen Psaki: Senator Manchin’s comments this morning on FOX are at odds with his discussions this week with the President, with White House staff, and with his own public utterances. Weeks ago, Senator Manchin committed to the President, at his home in Wilmington, to support the Build Back Better framework that the President then subsequently announced. Senator Manchin pledged repeatedly to negotiate on finalizing that framework “in good faith.”
On Tuesday of this week, Senator Manchin came to the White House and submitted—to the President, in person, directly—a written outline for a Build Back Better bill that was the same size and scope as the President’s framework, and covered many of the same priorities. While that framework was missing key priorities, we believed it could lead to a compromise acceptable to all. Senator Manchin promised to continue conversations in the days ahead, and to work with us to reach that common ground. If his comments on FOX and written statement indicate an end to that effort, they represent a sudden and inexplicable reversal in his position, and a breach of his commitments to the President and the Senator’s colleagues in the House and Senate. …
Manchin Pulls Support From Biden’s Social Policy Bill, Imperiling Its Passage
Statement from Press Secretary Jen Psaki
(It leans very heavily on Manchin to depart from the Dem agenda.)
The Path Ahead for Biden: Overcome Manchin’s Inflation Fears
Schumer Vows to Bring Spending Plan Back to Senate
(Meanwhile, the stock market continues to plummet.)
Manchin’s ‘no’ on $2 trillion social spending bill leaves White House, liberals fuming