DRONE STRIKE FALLOUT
President Joe Biden is weighing options for retaliation against an Iran-backed militia following an attack on U.S. soldiers in Jordan.
The attack on U.S. troops stationed in Jordan killed three Army Reservists and injured 40 more on Jan. 28.
National Security Council Coordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby speaks during a press briefing at the White House in Washington on Jan. 29, 2024. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times
“We will weigh an additional set of options… and the president will make his decision to respond appropriately,” National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby said. “The attacks need to stop.”
The administration has repeatedly claimed that Iran is “responsible” for the attack, but Kirby said that an investigation into which group launched the attack had not yet concluded.
As to whether Iran is seeking a war with the United States, Kirby demurred.
“That’s up for Iran to decide and for Iran to speak to,” Kirby said.
“We are not looking for a war with Iran. We are not seeking a conflict with the regime in a military way.”
U.S. troops have come under attack more than 160 times in Iraq, Syria, and the Red Sea since October, when the nation pledged its support for Israel’s war in Gaza.
Hawkish elements in Congress are now demanding that the administration retaliate against Iran, with some GOP leaders calling for direct strikes against the reg
“I am calling on the Biden administration to strike targets of significance inside Iran, not only as reprisal for the killing of our forces, but as deterrence against future aggression,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said.
Kirby rebuffed arguments that the Biden administration’s tit-for-tat exchanges with Iran-backed militias had invited the latest attack. The president, he added, would decide on what course of action to take when an investigation into the latest attack was concluded.
“There are decisions yet to come. Let the president make his decisions, let him weigh these options, and then we’ll act.”
—Andrew Thornebrooke
WHITE HOUSE v. JOHNSON, TRUMP ON BORDER
The White House and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Calif.) have been going back and forth over the soon-to-be-released deal reached between a bipartisan group of senators.
In a statement on Jan. 26, President Joe Biden said he would sign a bipartisan border agreement into law.
Johnson rejected the premise that Congress needs to give the president the authority to secure the border.
“President Biden falsely claimed yesterday he needs Congress to pass a new law to allow him to close the southern border, but he knows that is untrue,” he said on Jan. 27.
In a memo to reporters on Jan. 29, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre fired back at Johnson.
“If Speaker Johnson continues to believe—as President Biden and Republicans and Democrats in Congress do— that we have an imperative to act immediately on the border, he should give this administration the authority and funding we’re requesting to secure the border,” she wrote.
Johnson’s office responded to the memo.
“Speaker Johnson has been clear since the day he was handed the gavel that national security starts at our own border. The Secure the Border Act would codify this principle into federal law and he continues to strongly urge the Senate and president to support it or similar legislation,” said Raj Shah, Johnson’s deputy communications chief.
“But make no mistake, President Biden pledged on Friday to ‘shut down the border,’” he continued. “However, with the stroke of a pen, he could begin by restoring Remain in Mexico, ending catch and release, reforming asylum, and parole standards. His refusal places our national sovereignty at stake.”
The Secure the Border Act is a nonstarter for Biden and the Democrats even though Johnson has called for that bill, which the House passed last year, to be part of any border agreement.
—Jackson Richman
HOW COURTS ARE RESHAPING 2024 RACES
Federal and state court rulings issued since 2022’s midterms could diminish 2024 reelection odds for as many nine Republican House incumbents.
Court-imposed revamps spurred by Congressional redistricting legal challenges in Louisiana, Alabama, New York, and, potentially, Wisconsin, appear to benefit Democrats.
The potential impacts of those rulings may be mitigated but not offset by court decisions to uphold GOP-drawn congressional maps in North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, and Texas.
While simple math favors Republicans capturing the Senate in 2024—Democrats have 51-49 chamber advantage but hold of 23 of 34 seats on November ballots nationwide—court-imposed calculus makes it more difficult for the GOP to retain its 219-213 House advantage.
This is no more evident than in New York where last month, the Court of Appeals--New York’s Supreme Court— tossed out the 2022 Congressional map that saw Republicans chip Democrats’ 19-8 House bulge down to a 15-11 advantage and ordered an independent commission to redraw the state’s 26-district congressional map by Feb. 28.
Six freshmen Republicans from New York were elected in 2022. One is already gone. Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.) resigned in December. He will be succeeded by the winner of a Feb. 13 special election for the Long Island district Democrats stand a good chance of winning.
The other five GOP House newcomers from New York are in ‘crossover districts’ where they won 2022 elections in districts President Joe Biden won in 2020 and with more registered Democrats than Republicans.
Any court-ordered tweaking of these crossover districts would benefit Democrats and, potentially, determine which party rules the House in January 2025.
—John Haughey
WHAT’S HAPPENING
- Biden fundraises in Tampa Bay, Florida.
- The House Homeland Security Committee marks up impeachment articles against DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
- Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta testify in a House China panel hearing on the Chinese Communist Party’s support of America’s adversaries.
A former contractor for the IRS who leaked Trump’s tax returns has been sentenced to five years in prison, The Epoch Times’ Sam Dorman and Caden Pearson report. The judge called the leak the “biggest heist” in IRS history.
Trillions of dollars have been spent on combating “climate change,” which proponents of the theory say will substantially harm the planet in a matter of decades. But, The Epoch Times’ Katie Spence reported, there’s a problem with the data: nearly all of the temperature information cited, around 96 percent, has come from “urban heat sinks” where temperatures are much higher than other areas.
Following an attack on an American base in Jordan that left three Americans dead and dozens injured, many have been left wondering how the attack happened in the first place. According to an article by the Wall Street Journal, a simple misidentification of the drone that carried out the attack was responsible for the tragedy.
With Trump dominating in swing-state polls, Biden has been left scrambling to mount a defense. An article by the New York Times explores how he plans on doing that—and where pop superstar Taylor Swift could fit into it.
French officials are anxiously trying to appease the nation’s farmers ahead of a looming siege of Paris, Politico reports. Farmers’ protests are only the latest in a series of working-class protests against climate policies that seem designed to drive small farmers out of business.
