Now be bold. Throw a little obamacare into the mix, why not . We expect to see some action this afternoon in the Senate Finance committee as members work on their tax package, supporters are noting there is nonpartisan analysis saying the middle class would benefit from their tax package. To Mitch Mcconnells point, every group gets tax relief here. The differences that the burden of Taxation Shifts so that those at the top and are going to pay a little bit more of the burden and those in the middle class are going to pay less of the burden. Bob corker of tennessee, jeff flake of arizona have expressed concerns about the nations debt. G. O. P. Leaders will need to assure them that this tax package wont blow a hole in the deficit. Some key republicans a tax reform would bring in more revenue by bringing jobs and investment back to the u. S. Meanwhile, democrats are taking aim. Ive never seen a more blatant attempt at a corporate welfare bill than this bill. They are literally taking mone
issue a death nail in the same way that the women s liberation movement in the 70s they couldn t stop. they make abortion their hobby horse to curtail a woman s right to bodily autonomy, and they have this victory with dobbs. it feels so familiar to dobson son sense because i think it s worth lingering for a moment at least in jobs they were honest enough to say we are overturning roe v. wade. it s not even clear from the majority opinion, although functionally i think melissa is exactly right, it functionally over turns and greater and fisher and all of the affirmative action cases. it doesn t say it. and justice sotomayor and who descend calls out as you socially is saying you can t say you re not overturning it when you re overturning it. there s a level of disingenuousness. but i think that other thing that is really shocking and
they have this victory with dobbs. it feels so familiar to dobson son sense because i think it s worth lingering for a moment at least in jobs they were honest enough to say we are overturning roe v. wade. it s not even clear from the majority opinion, although functionally i think melissa is exactly right, it functionally over turns and greater and fisher and all of the affirmative action cases. it doesn t say it. and justice sotomayor and who descend calls out as you socially is saying you can t say you re not overturning it when you re overturning it. there s a level of disingenuousness. but i think that other thing that is really shocking and that feels familiar from dobbs is this very cynical use of this lawyer amazingly important history of civil rights victories that culminates in circumstance with brown v. board, and much like justice
great have you back on the show, thanks forjoining us. if we look at what vladimir putin said in his address earlier today, he said all necessary steps were taken at the start of the mutiny and it would have been suppressed anyway. you sit on the intelligence committee, is that true? was the kremlin in control the entire time? i haven t seen any evidence to suggest that one way or the other things were under control. it s really unusual for a military convoy to be travelling hundreds of miles down a highway unchallenged in russia and for them to have taken over the military headquarters at rostov on don, just maybe betrays a little bit of the disingenuousness of mr putin s statement. he also said he would keep his promise to the wagner group who wanted to to go to belarus.
in the downing street garden, the infamous bring your own booze drinks in the garden in number 10 in may 2020. the committee highlights concerns from some senior officials about whether it should go ahead, the social nature of the gathering they say should have been obvious because there was trestle tables, alcohol available, people from outside number 10 including carriejohnson, borisjohnson s wife, and they say the number of people increased while mrjohnson was there. so they say it can t be considered to have been essential for work purposes in the committee s eyes, and borisjohnson, they suggest, would not have advised the public at the time that that sort of event was essential for work purposes had he been asked. let s talk about then why the committee believes that and other breaches of the rules and borisjohnson s assertions about them constitutes contempt of parliament. in other words, getting in the way of parliament doing its job. the committee talks here on page 61, parag