Senator Markwayne Mullin On Who Was Actually Running The Biden White House: 'It Was Probably Kamala'
Oklahoma Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin joins Fox Across America With Jimmy Failla to share his thoughts on the early stages of the congressional investigation into the alleged cover-up of former President Joe Biden's cognitive decline.
'Let me just play my theory with me because I think the proof's always in the pudding. And so you just kind of got to look at things. And hindsight's 20/20. So let me just look back, right? I know this is going to sound crazy because they got a vice president in Kamala Harris because they wanted a weak vice president. However, they didn't realize how weak their president was. I truly do feel like that it was Kamala Harris's team that was leading the charge. And why I say that is who in their right mind would have picked her to be the VP when at the time her numbers were lower than Biden's numbers? Why wouldn't you have somebody, why wouldn't have an open convention? Why wouldn't you just pick somebody that may be more popular or may be center in the party? Why would you go with Kamala Harris, who had no chance to win when she started, because she never won a single vote even when she was in the presidential race? Unless she was the one that was controlling the White House the whole time. And if you think about how extreme the policies were, that lines exactly up with the way Kamala Harris and her politics are. I mean, you can even go back and look at Biden's politics. People thought he was going to be more of a moderate because his voting record was a little bit more moderate than most, but Kamala wasn't. She's always been too extreme. And when they came in office, they went extreme left and controlled the party. I don't think people gave Kamala Harris enough credit here. I think she was, in my opinion, and there's no proof in this, but just by looking at the facts, I think, she and her team was the ones that was actually running the White House.'
Senator Mullin On The 'Big, Beautiful Bill'
Senator Mullin also tasks your radio buddy with finding him a perfect intro song for his next appearance on the show. Listen to the podcast to hear the full conversation!
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
29 minutes ago
- The Hill
Proposed sale of millions of acres of public land under GOP budget bill prompts backlash
Related video above: Trump and Musk feud continues over 'Big, Beautiful bill' (NEXSTAR) – Over 2 million acres of public land would go up for sale across 11 states under the current version of the Republican budget bill – a proposal that has met criticism from conservationists, hunting groups, local politicians and even some conservatives. Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee, who chairs the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, included the sale of federal lands – a longtime ambition of Western conservatives to cede lands to local control – in a draft provision of the so-called 'One Big Beautiful Bill.' Lee has defended the plan as a way to boost domestic energy production, create new revenue streams and increase housing. The Republican said in a video released by his office that the sales would not include national parks, national monuments or wilderness. They would instead target 'isolated parcels' that could be used for housing or infrastructure, he said. 'Washington has proven time and again it can't manage this land. This bill puts it in better hands,' Lee said last Thursday. Lee has struggled to convince some members of his own party, however, and a similar measure was rejected by the House. Montana Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke led an effort to strip land sales out of the House version, saying he was a 'hard no' on similar measures. Montana was removed from the proposal over the protests of Zinke and other local officials. An analysis by The Wilderness Society found that more than 250 million acres currently under the Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service are at risk of sale. Lee's proposal does not specify what properties would be sold. It directs the secretaries of interior and agriculture to sell or transfer at least 0.5% and up to 0.75% of U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management holdings. That equals at least 2.1 million acres (868,000 hectares) and up to 3.2 million acres (1.3 million hectares). The states potentially affected by the proposal are Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming. The Wilderness Society and other conservation groups have reacted with outrage, saying it would set a precedent to fast-track the handover of cherished lands to developers. 'Shoving the sale of public lands back into the budget reconciliation bill, all to fund tax cuts for the wealthy, is a betrayal of future generations and folks on both sides of the aisle,' said Michael Carroll with The Wilderness Society. Others have expressed doubt that the lands potentially up for sale would ever be suitable for housing development. Some of the parcels up for sale in Utah and Nevada under the House proposal were far from developed areas. 'I don't think it's clear that we would even get substantial housing as a result of this,' Sen. Martin Heinrich, the ranking Democrat on the energy committee, said of the Senate version. 'What I know would happen is people would lose access to places they know and care about and that drive our Western economies.' Benji Backer, author of 'The Conservative Environmentalist,' has accused Sen. Lee on social media of 'secretly trying to sell' America's public land for development. 'I've never seen so many conservatives AND liberals stand together as I've seen in opposition of this proposed mass sale of public lands,' Backer posted on X. 'Conservation of our nation's beauty is a deeply patriotic and nonpartisan value.' An April poll sponsored by the Trust for Public and and conducted by YouGov found that, of the 4,000 Americans surveyed, 71% opposed the sale of public land. The opposition was bipartisan: 61% were Trump voters in 2024, and 85% Harris voters. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Axios
32 minutes ago
- Axios
Support for regulating psychoactive hemp gains momentum in NC
Bipartisan support for restricting hemp in North Carolina is gaining steam, with GOP lawmakers unveiling yet another proposal Tuesday that would regulate intoxicating weed-like products in the state. Why it matters: The new legislation, backed by the state's most powerful Republican, is one of several bills proposed in recent months that would crack down on psychoactive hemp products in North Carolina. Though marijuana remains illegal in any form, the state is among the most lenient in the country in its regulation of hemp-derived consumables, but a bipartisan movement to change that has been building. What they're saying: "Stores selling these hemp products are popping up in towns across North Carolina, and children are getting ahold of these products," Senate Leader Phil Berger said in a press release about the bill Monday night. "Without these regulations, the availability of these dangerous products is only going to get worse." Driving the news: On Tuesday morning, Republican lawmakers in North Carolina's state Senate rolled out the most restrictive yet viable proposal yet to regulate hemp while moving to ban products made with any hemp-derived cannabinoids other than delta-9, the psychoactive component of marijuana. The bill would also set age and dosage limits and licensing and testing standards for sellers and manufacturers. Yes, but: It would not legalize marijuana, however — a proposal that has been floated in previous sessions but has yet to surface this year. Flashback: "It's really ironic that in some ways, the most liberal, pro-marijuana adult-use state in the country is North Carolina," Democratic Gov. Josh Stein told WRAL in an exclusive interview earlier this month, in which he also announced he was launching a task force to explore regulations on THC products and marijuana legalization "It's not Colorado, it's not Massachusetts, it's not these states that legalized it and then created a regulatory structure to sell it. It's North Carolina, where we have no rules whatsoever." State of play: As of now, the state has no limits — or age restrictions — on any cannabinoids with psychoactive effects much like those of THC, including delta-9. The new bill unveiled Tuesday, however, would outright ban "synthetic" high-inducing hemp products that can be found on shelves just a few blocks from the state legislature, including delta-8, THC-A, delta-7 and delta-10. The bill also appears to ban CBD, another hemp-derived cannabinoid. The cannabis plant has more than 100 cannabinoids. Some of them produce a weed-like high, while others, like CBD, are not. The other side: House Rules Chairman Rep. John Bell, who is the president of CBD and hemp manufacturer Asterra Labs, is "disappointed in the bill," he told Axios in a text message Tuesday. "This bill will destroy the hemp industry and move it out of state. Not one stakeholder was involved." He had not expressed the same opposition to another bill proposed earlier this session that would regulate his industry, though he told Axios at the time that the legislation wouldn't necessarily be a slam dunk for his company because it would implement new licensing fees and require changes to how it packages its products, for example. Democrats and Republicans alike expressed support for the new legislation, however, when it was unveiled in a committee hearing Tuesday morning. North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson also attended the committee meeting. "This is long overdue," Jackson, a Democrat, told lawmakers. "One of the major themes in terms of feedback that I've gotten from law enforcement and from families over the last six months has been about this issue — and usually happens when a family learns that it is truly the Wild West, at least with respect to what children are allowed to buy in these places."
an hour ago
Under a hot summer sun, South Carolina's governor says energy law will keep air conditioners humming
COLUMBIA, S.C. -- Under the hot South Carolina summer sun, Republican Gov. Henry McMaster held a ceremonial bill signing for a law he and other supporters said will make sure the rapidly growing state has the energy to run air conditioners and anything else well into the future. McMaster signed the bill into law more than a month ago. But Wednesday's ceremony was a chance to bring utility executives and other workers together with lawmakers to celebrate the promise from supporters that the law will clear the way to meet the power needs of the 1.5 million people the state has added this century — and its fast industrial growth. 'It is hot and promising to get hotter, so we'll be very quick here. This is of course to celebrate a great step for South Carolina,' McMaster said at the ceremony, which lasted less than 15 minutes before most everyone went back into the air-conditioned mansion. The law has immediate impacts. It clears the way for private Dominion Energy and state-owned Santee Cooper to work together on a 2,000-megawatt natural gas plant on the site of a former coal-fired power plant in Colleton County as long as regulators give their OK. Utilities now can appeal decisions from those regulators at the Public Service Commission directly to the South Carolina Supreme Court, meaning projects or rate cases won't be in limbo for years as they wind through the courts. Power companies can now ask for smaller rate increases every year instead of hitting customers with what was sometimes a double-digit increase to cover inflation and rising costs after four or five years. Also in this session, lawmakers cleared the way for cloud computer companies, utilities or others to offer to take over the long-abandoned project to build two new nuclear reactors at the V.C. Summer site near Jenkinsville. Ratepayers paid billions of dollars on the project, which was abandoned in 2017, well before it generated a watt of power. The feasibility of restarting construction or whether a private entity or a utility could get the licenses and permissions that have lapsed has not been determined. The bill didn't get unanimous support. Some Democrats worried consumer protections and energy efficiency efforts were removed. Some Republicans and Democrats worried the state didn't set limits on data centers and that would allow the computer farms to suck up massive amounts of the new energy and raise costs to homeowners and others while providing few local benefits. But Wednesday was a day to celebrate for someone like Dominion Energy South Carolina President Keller Kissam sweating in his suit and tie instead of the short-sleeved polo he would prefer to wear. 'With the heat we experience in South Carolina and you've got to be able to produce 24/7,' Kissam said. 'Our customers expect when they flip a switch or bump the thermostat there's going to be enough electricity.'
