Independent News

This post was originally published on this site

Last I checked, not a single midterm general election ballot had been cast. But one would never know it based on all the doomsday scenarios being floated for Democrats.

Don’t get me wrong—things aren’t exactly pretty out there. The enthusiasm gap doesn’t look good, with roughly two-thirds of Republicans eager to get to the polls while only about half of Democrats say the same thing. In 2018, it was two-thirds of Democrats who couldn’t wait to make their voices heard, presaging the party’s historic gains in the House.

President Joe Biden’s approvals also remain low—in the low 40s per FiveThirtyEight’s aggregate, and in the high 30s in Civiqs tracking.

But that doesn’t tell the whole story. More than a month ago, before Russia invaded Ukraine, Biden’s numbers had been slipping in Civiqs’ tracking poll for nearly a year. But the president’s stewardship of a swift and united global response has helped remind Americans why having a steady, competent commander in chief matters. Since the invasion, Biden’s job approval among Democrats and Independents improved more than a handful of points in Civiqs tracking. Even some Trump-Biden voters have been buoyed by Biden’s presence and Trump’s absence during this international crisis.

Not to be crass, but it’s a reset Washington Democrats could be capitalizing on—after all, we have to win the fight for democracy here at home in order to win it abroad. Ukraine wouldn’t be getting anywhere near the help Biden has given it if Trump was still in office. In fact, Trump dedicated his four years in office to weakening NATO, kneecapping Ukraine, and strengthening the hand of Russian President Vladimir Putin on the world stage while Republicans silently looked on.

So today on The Brief, we’re going to talk about midterm messaging and some missed opportunities for the Democrats. The fact is, a coalition of white, Black, Latino, and Asian American voters united in 2018 and 2020 to oust both Trump and Republicans from power. That cross-racial coalition of voters were the heroes of 2020, and they can come together again to cast a vote for democracy in 2022.  

But in order for that to happen, Democrats will have to continually remind Americans what a threat Republicans truly pose to American democracy. The good news is, that message is there for the taking based on headlines that present themselves on a near-daily basis. Here’s a brief sampling of eye-popping stories that fit the bill over the past couple weeks:

• Federal judge concludes in a ruling that Trump “likely” committed a felony related to the violent Jan. 6 insurrection
• Trump publicly solicits dirt on President Biden from U.S. adversary, global pariah, and likely war criminal Putin
• Trump’s White House phone logs just happen to include a 7-hour gap on Jan. 6
• Conservative activist Ginni Thomas, wife of sitting Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, was actively pushing Trump’s White House to overturn the 2020 election results

That doesn’t even begin to touch more localized issues that Trump is handing Democrats as Republican candidates cling to him in order to prevail in their primaries.

Washington Democrats simply cannot run on accomplishments alone. Even though they have delivered some wins, those wins are simply not enough to overpower Republicans’ steady drumbeat about inflation, which has become many voters’ top issue.

Thanks to so many activists’ work in 2018 and 2020, Americans saved the country from an inevitable slide toward fascism under Republican rule. The pundit has declared the midterms over based on historical trends. But as beloved Daily Kos alum Meteor Blades points out, the pundit class often gets it wrong.

Remember when Republicans were going to retake the House this fall through gerrymandering alone? Not exactly.

So let’s get to work! Join us for a great free-flowing discussion with my good friend, Joe Sudbay, a frequent guest host for SiriusXM Progress and a political consultant who works with progressive groups on issues like immigration, LGBTQ rights, and more; and my co-host, our own Daily Kos communications direction Carolyn Fiddler, a keen observer of state legislative politics and Virginia aficionado.  

This post was originally published on this site

The team got back together to celebrate that big fucking deal, the Affordable Care Act, with former President Barack Obama joining President Joe Biden at the White House Tuesday. It’s the first public appearance at the White House by President Obama since January 2017 and it’s to formally announce the already proposed rule to fix the “family glitch” in the law that has made health insurance too expensive for millions of families.

It was a happy reunion.
 

“It’s fitting that the first time you return to the White House is to celebrate a law that’s transformed millions of lives,” President Biden told Obama. “Because of you. […] A law that shows hope leads to change, and you did that. You did it. Let’s be honest, the Affordable Care Act has been called a lot of things, but Obamacare is the most fitting. Obamacare.”
 

“Twelve years later, Republicans are still promising to repeal the Affordable Care Act if they get the chance,” Biden continued. “Well, I got a better idea. Instead of destroying the Affordable Care Act, let’s keep building on it.”

The White House fact sheet for the new proposed rule says that the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service are proposing to simply eliminate the “family glitch,” a weedy and complicated determination made by those entities way back when that tried to define “affordable” and failed for many families.

They did cause the glitch in the first place, so they are in a position to eliminate it. They also explain what the glitch is:

Current regulations define employer-based health insurance as “affordable” if the coverage solely for the employee, and not for family members, is affordable, making family members ineligible for a premium tax credit even though they need it to afford high-quality coverage through the Marketplace.  For family members of an employee offered health coverage through an employer, the cost of that family coverage can sometimes be very expensive and make health insurance out of reach.

It wasn’t the original intent of the law, but it’s been one of its biggest failings in the decade since Obamacare passed. The Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) estimates that 5.1 million people are caught in it, the majority of them children. The majority of them—85%, or 4.4 million—are enrolled through employer-sponsored health care but are “likely spending far more for health insurance coverage than individuals with similar incomes eligible for financial assistance on the ACA Marketplaces.” The families “could spend less on premiums if they could enroll in Marketplace plans and qualify for subsidies” with the glitch eliminated, KFF finds.

In addition to fixing the glitch, the White House fact sheet says Biden will issue “a new Executive Order directing federal agencies to continue doing everything in their power to expand affordable, quality health coverage.” That includes making enrollment simpler and making it easier for people to understand coverage options, improving coverage, making benefits more generous, and “Continuing to make health coverage more accessible and affordable by expanding eligibility and lowering costs for Americans with ACA, Medicare, or Medicaid coverage.”

How the agencies are going to do all that is not spelled out, but Biden is apparently looking to them to be creative in figuring it out. That last one is key.

Biden and the congressional Democrats have a problem: the expiration of the American Rescue Plan’s enhanced premium subsidies at the end of the year. People with existing Obamacare plans are going to start getting notices in October of their new premium rates, which could as much as double with the expiration of ARP rates. Democrats intended to make them permanent in the Build Back Better plan, but Joe Manchin torpedoed that.

Vice President Kamala Harris called on Congress to fix that and pass the permanent extension of the expanded premiums. She also called for the last 12 states that are still blocking people from Medicaid to finally take the Obamacare expansion. “Currently there are 12 states in our nation that refuse to expand Medicaid for no reason other than petty partisan obstruction. As a result, 4 million people in our country are locked out of coverage.”

So President Biden needs to do whatever he can do unilaterally to lower those costs.

RELATED STORIES:

This post was originally published on this site

In an effort to push an anti-LGBTQ+ agenda as far as they can manage to, Republicans have taken a renewed liking to the words “grooming” and “predatory” in recent months. Conservatives at all levels of government have been pushing anti-trans legislation, especially when it comes to sports and gender-affirming health care, but have more recently branched into traditional homophobic rhetoric; for example, the ‘Don’t Say Gay’ law in Florida, and the comparable one being considered in Texas. 

Whether conservatives are fueling false hysteria about trans women using the women’s bathroom, youth having books by and about LGBTQ+ people, or teachers simply talking about queer identities and history in the classroom, though, it comes down to one core idea: Stop it. Republicans absolutely want to eliminate queer identities as much as they can, and that includes bolstering hate against openly LGBTQ+ people and allies by going backward in time to suggest LGBTQ+ adults (and allies) are essentially predators who are “grooming” young people and trying to “turn” them LGBTQ+.

Obviously, this is rooted in queerphobia and completely indefensible. Republicans as a party, though, offer up an incredible sense of surreal hypocrisy when we consider a recent bill coming out of Tennessee that seeks to do two terrible things. First, it wants to establish common-law marriage as only between one man and one woman, and second, it wants to repeal a recent law that bans marriages for children under 17. And they want to accuse queer people of being groomers??

RELATED STORY: Openly gay teacher with decades of experience fired after giving Pride bracelets to high schoolers

House Bill 233 would define common-law marriages as between “one man” and “one woman” without a minimum age requirement, as covered at Salon. Right now, minors can get married in Tennessee at the age of 17, provided they have parental consent.

For background, the federal government actually does not have a minimum age for marriage. Weird? Yes. States are allowed to set their own guidelines, which, disturbingly, results in an estimated 300,000 child marriages happening in the U.S. between 2000 and 2018, according to the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF.) 

If your first thought is, well, that sounds like a cover-up for child abuse and child sexual abuse—you’re probably right! While sexual violence can happen to anyone, it feels like these situations are especially ripe for minors who may be raised in particularly oppressive, isolated environments, like those who are forced to be in what are essentially religious cults, youth who are homeschooled, or adolescents who otherwise are separated from “normal” daily life and resources.

Thinking about people in positions of power who could use legal loopholes like these to coerce, manipulate, and abuse children of all genders is truly horrifying. It’s also important to look at this as an intergenerational issue; children forced into marriage, for example, might be trapped in cycles of dependency, poverty, lack of education, or lack of employment opportunities, trapping them in abusive or unsafe environments. In addition to mental health struggles, new children could be brought into this cycle, and perhaps even be forced into continuing it. 

Democratic Rep. Mike Stewart brought up child abuse when the bill was on the table in the subcommittee, according to local outlet WKRN, describing the bill as “basically a get out of jail free card” for people who are essentially committing statutory rape. 

Republican Rep. Tom Leatherwood, who sponsors the bill, described it as providing an “alternative form of marriage” for pastors and those who have a “conscientious objection” to the “current pathways” to marriage in the law, according to the outlet.

And Leatherwood’s framing is where we can tie LGBTQ+ rights and queerphobia in here on another level. So same-sex marriage is so abhorrent to conservatives that they want to establish their own separate marriage path … which includes being able to marry children.

But we’re the groomers? Got it.

If you want to fully lean into the ick, you can catch a campaign video from Leatherwood from a couple of years ago, where he’s described as having an “A” rating with the NRA and having the ability to stand strong on the Constitution and “conservative Christian principles” in D.C. 

I’d say that I wonder which “conservative Christian principles” include child marriage here, but it’s safe to say we already know. 

Sign the petition: Demand the Senate pass the Equality Act and protect the LGBTQ community from discrimination.

This post was originally published on this site

For starters, here’s a few bullet points about the historic job growth under the stewardship of President Joe Biden:

• U.S. employers added 431,000 jobs in March—the 11th consecutive month of job growth above 400,000
• March’s job gains marked the longest such stretch of growth in records dating back to 1939, according to the Wall Street Journal
• “The economy has recovered more than 90 percent of the 22 million jobs lost in the spring of 2020, far surpassing initial forecasts,” according to the New York Times
• Workers have also seen healthy wage gains of 5.6% over the past year
• The unemployment rate sits at 3.6%, down from 6.4% when Biden took office
• President Biden’s economy created an average of 568,000 per month during his first year in office—the largest job growth in a single year by any U.S. president in recorded history

The long and the short of it is: President Biden isn’t just beating expectations on job growth coming out of the pandemic, he’s blowing expectations out of the water.

Except … inflation, which is a natural outgrowth of the hottest jobs market in nearly a century alongside rising prices. Money in people’s pockets means people are consuming goods at a faster pace than they were before, and the economy is struggling to keep. Pandemic-related supply chain issues that are delaying some products from reaching the market have also exacerbated the situation.

Inflation certainly hasn’t helped American consumers’ perceptions of the economy, and Republicans have been pounding home the message at every opportunity. Politico reported:

An official with the National Republican Congressional Committee told me this week that of the 30 unique digital ad campaigns that the group has run this cycle, “probably 28 of them” dealt with cost increases for goods and services; an astounding 93 percent.

But Republicans are also getting a lot of help with messaging. So much help, in fact, that fully 37% of register voters believe the U.S. has had a net loss of jobs over the past year, according to a February survey from the progressive consortium Navigator Research. That delusional outlook includes 47% of Republicans and 43% of Independents. And overall, only 28% of respondents correctly said the U.S. had netted positive jobs gains over the past year.

As Press Run founder and editor Eric Boehlert pointed out, mainstream media appears to be fully invested in convincing Americans that Biden’s historic job gains are actually bad news for the country. Here’s a sampling of headlines following another strong jobs report last week:

• “America’s Job Market Is On Fire. Here’s Why It Doesn’t Feel Like It” (CNN)

• “Booming Job Growth Is a Double-Edged Sword For Joe Biden” (CNN)

• “Why a Great Jobs Report Can’t Save Joe Biden” (CNN)

• “Unemployment Hits Pandemic Low in March, But Uncertainty Looms Ahead” (Washington Post)

• “Biden Gets a Strong Jobs Report, But a Sour Mood Still Prevails” (Washington Post)

So hey, tell a friend, tell a coworker, tell a neighbor that a big reason inflation is high is because Joe Biden has created the hottest jobs market in nearly a century. The alternative at this point would be rising prices due to pandemic supply chain issues and the War in Ukraine alongside a sagging jobs market.

This post was originally published on this site

ExxonMobil could see its highest quarterly profits since 2008, the company announced on Monday. According to Reuters, oil and gas operations alone accounted for $9.3 billion for the first quarter of 2022. A combination of the Russia-Ukraine conflict and Exxon’s lack of hedging meant the polluter benefitted greatly from geopolitical conflict and the world’s continuing reliance on fossil fuels. Exxon is so explicitly profiting off of some of the worst issues the world faces that even lawmakers have taken notice. On Wednesday, the House Energy and Commerce Committee will hold a hearing titled “Gouged at the Gas Station: Big Oil and America’s Pain at the Pump.” Naturally, Exxon CEO and Chairman Darren Woods is scheduled to testify, as are his counterparts from Chevron, BP, Shell, and other major fossil fuel players.

The meeting comes a day after many oil execs were scheduled to attend another meeting on high gas prices to be held by the House Natural Resources Committee that they ultimately chose not to even bother with. That hearing has since been canceled, as apparently it’s simply too taxing for oil and gas heads to even show up when asked. Of the three companies requested to testify at the House Natural Resources Committee hearing—Occidental, EOG, and Devon—only Devon Energy’s Richard Muncrief will testify at the House Energy and Commerce Committee meeting. It’s anyone’s guess what Occidental CEO Vicki Hollub and EOG CEO William Thomas will be up to instead, aside from idly profiting off of our languishing climate.

High gas prices have devastated Americans, who are paying on average around $4.18 per gallon. Those who rely on their vehicles to commute— and especially those who use their cars for their very jobs—have little recourse in recouping that substantial loss. Uber and Lyft began adding a fuel surcharge to attempt to address the issue, while DoorDash is offering a pittance for those who drive at least 175 miles or more. And still oil and gas companies continue to profit. There isn’t a whole lot that anyone relying on a car for transportation can do unless policies are changed and these windfall profits are taxed.

Exxon appears to have few worries, save for when it comes to doing the right thing. The fossil fuel giant all but admitted that pulling out of Russia would be bad for business, with the company worrying that it would cost $4 billion to make good on its promise to “discontinue operations at the Sakhalin-1 project and [develop] steps to exit the venture.” Exxon operates Sakhalin-1, an offshore oil and gas consortium which the company has a 30% stake in. The news appears not to have made much of a dent in Exxon’s stock, which rose slightly Tuesday morning. The company will release its full Q1 earnings report on April 29.

This post was originally published on this site

Michigan Rep. Fred Upton, who was one of the 10 Republicans to vote to impeach Donald Trump last year, announced Tuesday that he would not seek a 19th term this fall. Upton emailed his supporters that he believed “it is time to pass the torch,” though the person who will most likely be claiming that beacon in the new 4th Congressional District is his colleague and would-be primary foe, Trump-backed Rep. Bill Huizenga.

While it’s possible that Upton’s departure will entice someone else to run against Huizenga in the August GOP primary, they’d need to collect at least 1,000 valid signatures by the April 19 filing deadline. No notable Democrats have entered the race so far either for the new version of the 4th, a southwestern Michigan seat Trump would have carried 51-47 in 2020.

Huizenga announced back in December right after the state’s new congressional maps were completed that he’d be seeking re-election in the new 4th and he earned an endorsement from Trump last month. Upton, by contrast, spent months keeping the political world guessing whether he’d go up against Huizenga in the primary or retire, though until Tuesday, he’d sounded likely to run again. Upton in February even launched a $400,000 ad campaign where he told viewers, “If you want a rubber stamp as your congressman, I’m the wrong guy. But if you want someone committed to solving problems, putting policy over politics, then I’m asking for your support.”

Upton, though, said he was still undecided about 2022, and his retirement announcement proves he wasn’t just playing coy. On Tuesday, he insisted that redistricting mattered more to him than any backlash from his impeachment vote, saying, “My district was cut like Zorro—three different ways.” However, it was Huizenga who, at least on paper, was more disadvantaged by the new map: While about two-thirds of the residents of the new 4th are currently Upton’s constituents, Huizenga represents only about a quarter of the seat he’s now the frontrunner to claim.

Upton’s decision ends a long career in politics that began in the late 1970s when he started working for local Rep. David Stockman, and he remained on his staff when Stockman became Ronald Reagan’s first director of the Office of Management and Budget. Upton decided to seek elected office himself in 1986 when he launched a primary challenge to Rep. Mark Siljander, who had succeeded Stockman in the House in 1981, in an earlier version of the 4th District.

Siljander was an ardent social conservative well to the right of even Reagan: Among other things, he’d unsuccessfully tried to torpedo Sandra Day O’Connor’s nomination to the Supreme Court in 1981 because he didn’t feel she was sufficiently conservative, and he even threatened to vote against the White House’s properties to try and stop O’Connor. Siljander, though, had taken just 58% of the vote in his 1984 primary, which showed that a significant number of primary voters were unhappy with him.

Upton argued that, while both he and Siljander were “conservative Republican[s],” the incumbent had ignored his constituents to focus on international issues. Upton, by contrast, argued that he’d work better with the party’s leadership and seek committee assignments that would allow him to direct his energies to domestic concerns. The race took a truly nasty turn late in the campaign when audio leaked of Siljander telling local clergy members to aid him in order to “break the back of Satan,” arguing that his loss “would send a shock wave across America that Christians can be defeated in Congress by impugning their integrity and smear tactics.”

Upton ended up dispatching the congressman 55-45, a wide result both sides attributed to Siljander’s comments. Upton’s team, while denying that the outcome represented a loss for the religious right, predicted, “Fred’s tactics will be much more moderate and more reasonable.” Upton easily prevailed the general election and had no trouble winning for decades: Siljander, for his part, was last in the news in late 2020 when Trump pardoned what an angry Upton described as “a series of federal crimes including obstruction of justice, money laundering and lobbying for an international terrorist group with ties to Osama bin Laden, al-Qaida and the Taliban.”

Upton in 2002 easily turned back a primary challenge from state Sen. Dale Shugars 66-32 in what was now numbered the 6th District, but he was more vulnerable to an intra-party challenge in 2010 when the burgeoning tea party turned its wrath on the longtime establishment figure. His opponent was former state Rep. Jack Hoogendyk, who had badly failed to unseat Democratic Sen. Carl Levin two years before but argued that Upton was insufficiently conservative. The congressman outspent Hoogendyk by an 18-to-1 margin but prevailed only 57-43, which enticed Hoogendyk to try again in 2012.

However, while the anti-tax Club for Growth ran commercials this time against Upton, who by now was ​​chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee, the incumbent worked hard to emphasize his opposition to the Obama administration and won by a larger 67-33 margin. That was the last time he faced a serious primary challenge at the ballot box, but in 2014 he went through his first expensive general election campaign when a law professor Larry Lessig directed his Mayday PAC, which he called his “super PAC to end super PACs,” against Upton.

Mayday spent over $2 million to aid a previously-unheralded Democrat named Paul Clements, and while Upton didn’t come close to losing in that red wave year, Democrats hoped his 56-40 showing meant he could be beaten in a better political climate. Clements sought a rematch in 2016, but Upton won by a 59-36 spread.

In 2018, though, he faced a considerably tougher battle against physician Matt Longjohn at a time when the GOP was on the defensive nationwide. Upton got some surprising help during that campaign when Joe Biden delivered a speech in his district that was paid in part by an Upton family foundation; Biden, who was apparently motivated to praise Upton because of the congressman’s work on a bill called the 21st Century Cures Act, declared the congressman was “one of the finest guys I’ve ever worked with” and “the reason we’re going to beat cancer.” Ultimately, the congressman prevailed 50-46 in what was by far the closest race of his career.

Democrats hoped they could finally take him down in 2020, but Upton returned to form and beat state Rep. Jon Hoadley 56-40 as Trump was carrying his seat 51-47. Two months later, Upton responded to the Jan. 6 attack by voting for impeachment, a vote that arguably did more than anything else to close out his lengthy time in Congress.

This post was originally published on this site

Judge Kentanji Brown Jackson’s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court has advanced to the full Senate, with an extra procedural step forced by Republicans on the Judiciary Committee who decided to go with Team QAnon. That tactic was blessed by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell when he told his members to go after Jackson as soft on crime, a vile, racist lie that consumed hours of the hearings.

So when three Republicans, Sens. Susan Collins (ME), Lisa Murkowski (AK), and Mitt Romney (UT) announced they would support Jackson’s confirmation and voted with Democrats to bring her nomination to the floor, the inevitable happened. The vilest QAnon House member, Georgia’s Majorie Taylor Greene, smeared them on Twitter, calling them “pro-pedophile.” Thanks, Mitch, for endorsing that.

In the middle of all that is Judge Jackson, objectively the most qualified nominee to the court in nearly a century. She has had more years on the bench as a trial court judge than any nominee since 1923. When she’s elevated to the Supreme Court, she will become just the second justice to sit on all three levels of the federal judiciary: District, Circuit, and the Supreme Court.

Judge Jackson also has more time on the bench—more than eight years—than Justices Thomas, Roberts, Kagan, and Barrett had combined when they were confirmed. She will be the first justice who has also worked as a public defenders and is the first since Thurgood Marshall retired in 1991 to have substantial criminal defense experience.

Listen and subscribe to Daily Kos Elections’ The Downballot podcast with David Nir and David Beard

She rose to where she is as a Black woman in this society. She sat calmly and stoically through 20 hours of abuse from foaming-at-the-mouth Republicans. Contrast that with Brett Kavanaugh, who yelled, insulted, and temper-tantrumed his way through his hearings. Judge Jackson clearly has the temperament to sit on the court. And she will, beginning in the October term of the court when Justice Stephen Breyer steps down.

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer filed for cloture Tuesday, and the Senate voted 53-47 to proceed to the nomination. The next step is the cloture vote Thursday morning, after the requisite time under Senate procedure has passed. Following the cloture vote Thursday, there are up to 30 hours of “debate” on the nomination.

We’ll see then whether Republicans are really intent upon doing all they can to obstruct the inevitable—her confirmation—or if they’ll decide they’re rather start their two-week spring recess early, and allow the vote on Thursday instead of Friday.

This post was originally published on this site

As a contempt vote in the House looms for Trump White House officials who sidestepped subpoenas from the Jan. 6 Committee, NBC News has reported first that investigators of the attempted overthrow will meet today with Ivanka Trump, the ex-president’s daughter and onetime adviser.

Ivanka reportedly appears Wednesday on the heels of a private deposition given by her husband and fellow senior adviser to the former president, Jared Kushner. Kushner appeared voluntarily. Ivanka was first asked to appear in January and talks have reportedly been ongoing since then. 

The probe is particularly interested in hearing details from Ivanka about her father’s conduct before, during, and after the siege. Former Vice President Mike Pence’s national security adviser, Keith Kellogg, told the committee he and Ivanka were present when Trump called Pence to pressure him to stop the certification. 

As that call had ended, Ivanka turned to Kellogg and said of the vice president: “Mike Pence is a good man.”

RELATED STORY: Jan. 6 committee requests critical meeting with Ivanka Trump

RELATED STORY: Trump officials pumping election bunk inch closer to full contempt referral after tense hearing

It is unclear whether Ivanka Trump will appear remotely or in person. A representative for the committee declined to comment to Daily Kos on Wednesday.

If she indeed appears, she will be the second member of the Trump family circle to testify since Kushner went first last week.

Investigators have targeted phone records belonging to Eric Trump, as well as records belonging to Kimberly Guilfoyle, Donald Trump Jr.’s financée. Guilfoyle received a separate subpoena direct from the committee on March 3 following a voluntary appearance that fell apart fast.

The committee has appeared generous with Trump family members thus far, extending opportunities for “friendly” or voluntary meetings and granting time to negotiate appearances.

Guilfoyle was afforded that friendliness, too, but balked on the day of her deposition, when she realized she would have to testify in front of members of the committee as well as House counsel. Her attorney chalked up the opposition to a fear of media leaks.

Guilfoyle’s fundraising efforts around the rally at the Ellipse on Jan. 6 are front and center for the probe. Last year, text messages obtained by ProPublica showed Guilfoyle boasting about raising no less than $3 million for the event. She was also backstage at the rally, seen celebrating with those closest to the president just before his speech to a crowd that would soon descend violently on the U.S. Capitol.

RELATED STORY: A subpoena for Guilfoyle after deposition blowout

It is unclear if Guilfoyle has agreed to cooperate since her last botched appearance. 

Kushner’s appearance went smoothly according to Rep. Zoe Lofgren, a California Democrat who serves on the probe. Lofgren was mum on details during an appearance on CNN following the meeting but described Kushner as “precise.”

Though she did say Kushner “did not volunteer” anything. 

The meeting lasted six hours but Lofgren emphasized that the deposition was not “volatile.”

Fellow Jan. 6 investigator Rep. Elaine Luria told NPR Kushner’s testimony was “helpful.”

“I think that the committee really appreciates hearing information directly from people who have relevant facts about Jan. 6, and the fact that Jared Kushner came as a witness is helpful to building the story of our investigation,” the Virginia Democrat said.

Unlike Ivanka, Kushner was not in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6.

RELATED STORY: Texts show Kimberly Guilfoyle may have raised $3M for Jan. 6 rally

He was heading back to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia while she, according to testimony already provided to the committee, was busy trying to convince her father to say something publicly to soothe the mob attacking the Capitol and threatening to kill Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Vice President Pence. 

Where Ivanka’s insights into how she soothed her father during the riot are sought after by the committee, it’s likely that investigators asked Kushner about the widely reported role he played: telling Trump that he lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden. 

Luria said that Kushner’s testimony allowed the committee to “substantiate information” while providing “his own take on different reports on the Jan. 6 attack.”