Marjorie Taylor Greene Is First Republican Lawmaker to Call Gaza Crisis a ‘Genocide'
'It's the most truthful and easiest thing to say that Oct. 7 in Israel was horrific and all hostages must be returned, but so is the genocide, humanitarian crisis, and starvation happening in Gaza,' Ms. Greene said in a social media post on Monday evening.
It was the strongest in a series of escalating statements she has made in recent weeks criticizing Israel's conduct of the war and calling for action to end the suffering in Gaza. The stance is a clear break with the vast majority of Republicans in Congress, who have made unconditional support for Israel a hallmark of their foreign policy approach.
Ms. Greene's comments were a direct rebuke of one Republican colleague in particular, Representative Randy Fine of Florida, who has drawn intense criticism for comments he made on social media last week calling the images of starving children in Gaza a campaign of 'Muslim terror propaganda.'
'Release the hostages,' Mr. Fine wrote, adding, 'until then, starve away.'
Mr. Fine, a first-term lawmaker who has been outspoken in Congress about his Jewish faith and staunchly pro-Israel views, made the remarks the same day that he was elevated to a seat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the influential panel that focuses on international policy.
Mr. Fine made his comments before President Trump said there was 'real starvation' happening in Gaza and made commitments to offer additional support to increase aid.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
American Press
28 minutes ago
- American Press
Things to know about the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and its funding cuts
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which helps pay for PBS, NPR, 1,500 local radio and television stations as well as programs like 'Sesame Street' and 'Finding Your Roots,' said Friday that it would close after the U.S. government withdrew funding. The organization told employees that most staff positions will end with the fiscal year on Sept. 30. A small transition team will stay until January to finish any remaining work. The private, nonprofit corporation was founded in 1968 shortly after Congress authorized its formation. It now ends nearly six decades of fueling the production of renowned educational programming, cultural content and emergency alerts about natural disasters. Here's what to know: Losing funding President Donald Trump signed a bill on July 24 canceling about $1.1 billion that had been approved for public broadcasting. The White House says the public media system is politically biased and an unnecessary expense, and conservatives have particularly directed their ire at NPR and PBS. Lawmakers with large rural constituencies voiced concern about what the cuts could mean for some local public stations in their state. They warned some stations will have to close. The Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday reinforced the policy change by excluding funding for the corporation for the first time in more than 50 years as part of a broader spending bill. How it began Congress passed legislation creating the body in 1967, several years after then-Federal Communications Commission Chairman Newton Minow described commercial television a 'vast wasteland' and called for programming in the public interest. The corporation doesn't produce programming and it doesn't own, operate or control any public broadcasting stations. The corporation, PBS, NPR are independent of each other as are local public television and radio stations. Rural stations hit hard Roughly 70% of the corporation's money went directly to 330 PBS and 246 NPR stations across the country. The cuts are expected to weigh most heavily on smaller public media outlets away from big cities, and it's likely some won't survive. NPR's president estimated as many as 80 NPR stations may close in the next year. Mississippi Public Broadcasting has already decided to eliminate a streaming channel that airs children's programming like 'Caillou' and 'Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood' 24 hours a day. Maine's public media system is looking at a hit of $2.5 million, or about 12% of its budget, for the next fiscal year. The state's rural residents rely heavily on public media for weather updates and disaster alerts. In Kodiak, Alaska, KMXT estimated the cuts would slice 22% from its budget. Public radio stations in the sprawling, heavily rural state often provide not just news but alerts about natural disasters like tsunamis, landslides and volcanic eruptions. From Big Bird to war documentaries The first episode of 'Sesame Street' aired in 1969. Child viewers, adults and guest stars alike were instantly hooked. Over the decades, characters from Big Bird to Cookie Monster and Elmo have become household favorites Entertainer Carol Burnett appeared on that inaugural episode. She told The Associated Press she was a big fan. 'I would have done anything they wanted me to do,' she said. 'I loved being exposed to all that goodness and humor.' Sesame Street said in May it would also get some help from a Netflix streaming deal. Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. started 'Finding Your Roots' in 2006 under the title 'African American Lives.' He invited prominent Black celebrities and traced their family trees into slavery. When the paper trail ran out, they would use DNA to see which ethnic group they were from in Africa. Challenged by a viewer to open the show to non-Black celebrities, Gates agreed and the series was renamed 'Faces of America,' which had to be changed again after the name was taken. The show is PBS's most-watched program on linear TV and the most-streamed non-drama program. Season 10 reached nearly 18 million people across linear and digital platforms and also received its first Emmy nomination.
The Hill
28 minutes ago
- The Hill
Padilla on redistricting effort: ‘If Republicans were confident on their policy agenda, they'd be eager to defend it'
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) blasted Republicans for undertaking a mid-decade redistricting effort in Texas, saying the move reveals concerns about the party's economic message ahead of the midterms. 'If Republicans were confident on their policy agenda, they'd be eager to defend it with the people and to defend at the ballot box next November,' Padilla said in an interview on NBC News's 'Meet the Press.' 'But they know they're in trouble,' he continued. 'And so they're trying to rig the system to hold on to power next November. That's what this redistricting move is really about.' Texas Republicans proposed a congressional map last week designed to flip at least five Democratic seats to the GOP. The new lines, proposed at Trump's urging, would make it much harder for Democrats to seize control of the lower chamber in next year's midterm elections. 'Let's understand why Donald Trump is asking for five more Republican seats out of Texas. It's because his policies, especially his economic policies, have been so bad,' Padilla said. The California senator said the situation will get even more dire for Republicans once the effect of their 'big, beautiful bill' kicks in and 'people start losing their health care and their health care costs go up.'
Boston Globe
28 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's tariffs are making money. That may make them hard to quit.
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'The good news is that Tariffs are bringing Billions of Dollars into the USA!' Trump said on social media shortly after a weak jobs report showed signs of strain in the labor market. Advertisement Over time, analysts expect that the tariffs, if left in place, could be worth more than $2 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade. Economists overwhelmingly hope that doesn't happen and the United States abandons the new trade barriers. But some acknowledge that such a substantial stream of revenue could end up being hard to quit. Advertisement 'I think this is addictive,' said Joao Gomes, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. 'I think a source of revenue is very hard to turn away from when the debt and deficit are what they are.' The Port of Baltimore on June 30, 2025. ALYSSA SCHUKAR/NYT Trump has long fantasized about replacing taxes on income with tariffs. He often refers fondly to American fiscal policy in the late 19th century, when there was no income tax and the government relied on tariffs, citing that as a model for the future. And while income and payroll taxes remain by far the most important sources of government revenue, the combination of Trump's tariffs and the latest Republican tax cut does, on the margin, move the United States away from taxing earnings and toward taxing goods. Such a shift is expected to be regressive, meaning that rich Americans will fare better than poorer Americans under the change. That's because cutting taxes on income does, in general, provide the biggest benefit to richer Americans who earn the most income. The recent Republican cut to income taxes and the social safety net is perhaps the most regressive piece of major legislation in decades. Placing new taxes on imported products, however, is expected to raise the cost of everyday goods. Lower-income Americans spend more of their earnings on those more expensive goods, meaning the tariffs amount to a larger tax increase for them compared with richer Americans. Tariffs have begun to bleed into consumer prices, with many companies saying they will have to start raising prices as a result of added costs. And analysts expect the tariffs to weigh on the performance of the economy overall, which in turn could reduce the amount of traditional income tax revenue the government collects every year. Advertisement 'Is there a better way to raise that amount of revenue? The economic answer is: Yes, there is a better way, there are more efficient ways,' said Ernie Tedeschi, director of economics at the Yale Budget Lab and a former Biden administration official. 'But it's really a political question.' Workers welded steel components together at a Thomas Built Buses plant in High Point, N.C., on July 21, 2025. TRAVIS DOVE/NYT Tedeschi said that future leaders in Washington, whether Republican or Democrat, may be hesitant to roll back the tariffs if that would mean a further addition to the federal debt load, which is already raising alarms on Wall Street. And replacing the tariff revenue with another type of tax increase would require Congress to act, while the tariffs would be a legacy decision made by a previous president. 'Congress may not be excited about taking such a politically risky vote when they didn't have to vote on tariffs in the first place,' Tedeschi said. Some in Washington are already starting to think about how they could spend the tariff revenue. Trump recently floated the possibility of sending Americans a cash rebate for the tariffs, and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., recently introduced legislation to send $600 to many Americans. 'We have so much money coming in, we're thinking about a little rebate, but the big thing we want to do is pay down debt,' Trump said last month of the tariffs. Democrats, once they return to power, may face a similar temptation to use the tariff revenue to fund a new social program, especially if raising taxes in Congress proves as challenging as it has in the past. As it is, Democrats have been divided over tariffs. Maintaining the status quo may be an easier political option than changing trade policy. Advertisement 'That's a hefty chunk of change,' Tyson Brody, a Democratic strategist, said of the tariffs. 'The way that Democrats are starting to think about it is not that 'these will be impossible to withdraw.' It's: 'Oh, look, there's now going to be a large pot of money to use and reprogram.'' Of course, the tariffs could prove unpopular, and future elected officials may want to take steps that could lower consumer prices. At the same time, the amount of revenue the tariffs generate could decline over time if companies do, in fact, end up bringing back more of their operations to the United States, reducing the number of goods that face the import tax. 'This is clearly not an efficient way to gather revenue,' said Alex Jacquez, a former Biden official and the chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, a liberal group. 'And I don't think it would be a long-term progressive priority as a way to simply collect revenue.' This article originally appeared in
