Okay‚ we’ve all been there with the plastic bag and the crusts saved for a weekend walk to the park to feed the ducks. Whether you’re trying to entertain a grumpy toddler or just want to say hello to the local feathered population‚ we list why feeding ducks bread is so last year (or last five years) and what you can give to those hungry mallards at the park instead.What’s wrong with bread?As no doubt the comments section of this article will tell us‚ people have been feeding ducks bread in the park forever. But just because something is traditional doesn’t mean it is the right thing to do. There are several reasons why bread is not ideal‚ let's get into it. First‚ bread has very little nutritional value to a duck‚ it's basically junk food and ducks need a varied diet to be healthy. As the UK Canal and River Trust notes‚ stuffing themselves with bread can lead them to feel full‚ meaning they don’t forage for other foods with more nutritional content‚ which can lead to malnutrition.  This is especially dangerous for young ducklings where an overreliance on human food could even prevent the young animals from learning to forage for themselves. "Although ducks and swans can digest all types of bread‚ too much can leave them feeling full without giving them all of the important vitamins‚ minerals and nutrients they need‚" said a spokesperson for the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) in a statement to BBC News.Another large problem with bread is that it floats on the surface of the water and‚ uneaten‚ these soggy pieces then become a breeding ground for bacteria and fungi contributing to the rise of algae within the pond or lake that can spread and be dangerous to other species.Furthermore‚ uneaten bread can also attract other animals such as rats‚ which can spread disease. If birds are regularly fed in the same area‚ it can lead to a high concentration of animal feces‚ again spreading bacteria and being generally unpleasant.What should we feed ducks instead?It's important to understand that ducks are not going hungry without you. Ducks are omnivores‚ foraging on everything from pond weeds to worms‚ berries‚ and small insects. If you do however want to feed them‚ you probably have an assortment of duck-friendly snacks at home already in the larder or even freezer."We encourage people to use things like sweetcorn‚ porridge oats‚ and defrosted frozen peas as well as bird seed‚" says RSPB. Other healthy snacks include seeds‚ rice‚ any kind of lettuce like iceberg or rocket‚ vegetable peel‚ grapes‚ and carrots. Just note ducks don't chew their food‚ they just swallow it‚ so any food you give them should be broken down into bite-size pieces.  By all means‚ go to the park and feed our feathered friends – research has suggested that bird watching is beneficial for mental health – but pack a nutritious treat for them instead of the ends of your loaf. 

A new and immersive way of learning about heart health is tackling bias in medical teaching by putting the spotlight on female heart disease. The symptoms of female heart attacks are often very different from those experienced by males‚ sometimes confused for things like acid reflux or the flu. Built by Elsevier’s 3D4 Medical team‚ Complete HeartX wants to make it easier for students and clinicians to recognize female heart attacks. Human anatomy was long informed by the anatomy and physiology of male bodies‚ meaning that the medicine built on foundational ideas wasn’t always a good fit for females. In 2022‚ a new 3D model of female anatomy – the Complete Anatomy by Elsevier model of female anatomy‚ also built by the 3D4 Medical team – became the most advanced of its kind. Its goal? To improve the management of female patients by delivering teaching materials “for the benefit of every patient” and diversifying medical education. An aim that’s shared by Complete HeartX.As the first spatial computing app to teach coronary health‚ Complete HeartX allows users to literally push‚ pull‚ and turn the heart in any direction to examine blood flow and blockages. Clinical simulations mean students can learn about everything from anatomy to blood draws in a lifelike but safe rehearsal space‚ creating a unique learning experience.               We spoke to Irene Walsh‚ Sr. Director of Product &; Education Design at Elsevier Health‚ to find out more about how Complete HeartX is helping to tackle medical bias. It's a topical conversation for February‚ which is marked annually as American Heart Month.How is Complete HeartX tackling medical bias? Irene Walsh: Heart disease is one of the leading causes of death globally in women and that includes in the US and UK. As we know‚ heart disease can lead to heart attack (myocardial infarction). For these reasons‚ in Complete HeartX‚ we chose to spotlight the condition of myocardial infarction and how it can be experienced by a female patient. Female patients having a myocardial infarction are more likely to have more subtle symptoms‚ which are often confused as less life-threatening conditions such as the flu‚ acid reflux‚ or simply aging. We see that this can result in delayed medical intervention. At Elsevier Health we’re committed to addressing this gender inequity‚ and so we took the opportunity to spotlight the experience of a female patient with heart attack symptoms‚ and empower the public with this knowledge.  What's unique to Complete HeartX as an educational tool?IW: Complete HeartX opens up a new way of learning for students‚ where within one single experience‚ they can directly connect the theory of the anatomy and physiology that they learn‚ to the practice of a clinical skill. Students can fully immerse themselves in the incredibly detailed structures of the heart‚ and even walk inside‚ to fully discover each part and its function through spatial computing. It’s the first app of its kind for coronary education. It also pulls together learning material from some of Elsevier’s best-known and industry leading products‚ such as Gray's Anatomy textbook‚ Osmosis videos and Complete Anatomy models in one experience‚ to provide students with a truly multi-modal experience. This enables them to deep dive into topics as well as hit the key learning objectives all at once. Students can take blood in lifelike simulations.Image credit: Complete HeartXDo you have a favorite feature of the model? IW: I absolutely love the simulation section where you can learn the "why" behind each step of the process of taking blood‚ because it's helpful on so many levels – as a patient it's a real light-bulb moment to "peek behind the curtain" and understand why certain actions are taken‚ and as an aspiring healthcare provider‚ you get to learn the key steps of that skill. Why is diversifying medical education so important? IW: Medical education content has historically been predominantly male-centred‚ from male bodies‚ to illustrations‚ and human models. This focus on the male can set a bias in the early career of medical students‚ which we believe can go on to impact the healthcare outcomes of female patients down the line.Given we are one of the main providers of medical education materials and products‚ at Elsevier‚ we see the opportunity to leverage our reach and offer alternative learning pathways to the medical education community‚ to put diverse resources into their hands that counter this bias right from day one of medical school. This is the latest step we are taking to diversify medical education. We most recently did it by creating the first 3D female anatomy model in medical learning with Complete Anatomy followed by Complete Anatomy’s diverse skin tone model‚ the world’s most diverse offering of skin tone options in medical learning. Up until then medical texts globally were based on the white‚ European male model.

Congress wants to know what agencies know about UFOs‚ and‚ under a new law‚ agencies have to tell them‚ reports nextgov.com. New records management provisions included in the recently enacted 2024 defense policy bill require federal agencies to organize and tag records related to what the government calls “unidentified anomalous phenomena” or UAP. Agencies have until the end of the current fiscal year to “review‚ identify‚ and organize each UAP record in its custody for disclosure to the public and transmission to the National Archives‚” according to a memo sent Tuesday afternoon from Laurence Brewer‚ chief records officer for the U.S. Government‚ and Chris Naylor‚ NARA’s executive for research services‚ to federal agency records managers. A new‚ central collection of UAP records will be housed at the National Archives and Records Administration. The law passed without measures sought by backers‚ notably Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer‚ D-N.Y.‚ that would have set up a presidential commission with the authority to declassify records pertaining to UAP. “For decades‚ many Americans have been fascinated by objects mysterious and unexplained and it’s long past time they get some answers‚” Schumer said last July when the bipartisan legislation was introduced. “The American public has a right to learn about technologies of unknown origins‚ non-human intelligence‚ and unexplainable phenomena. Brewer and his team at NARA are tasked with providing records officers with guidance on the information required to set up the UAP collection and with creating a form agencies can use to tag records for collection in the UAP archive. The memo gets into the weeds about what records officers can expect from the metadata requirements‚ including information on classification levels and restrictions‚ as well as what can and can’t be publicly disclosed. NARA is asking agencies to get started identifying relevant records and to expect further instructions on tagging and transmitting records to the Archives. The post National Archives tees up new rules for UAP/UFO records appeared first on Anomalien.com.

You’d never know what’s inside that shipping container until you ‘hear’ it. That’s what exactly happened to a group of US Coast Guard inspectors. On a typical day of inspecting shipping containers at the Port of Houston‚ US Coast Guard officer Ryan McMahon and his team were surprised to hear what sounded like barking coming... The post US Coast Guard rescue stowaway dog after hearing ‘scratch’ from one of their 10‚000 shipping containers appeared first on Animal Channel.

The post 15 NFL Hearthrobs and Their Incredibly Adorable Dogs appeared first on Animal Channel.

The Student Development and Center for Civic Engagement at the Kalamazoo College in Kalamazoo‚ Michigan‚ put on a week-long event called “SexCon.” The week‚ “dedicated to creating space for exploring sexuality‚ learning about sexual and relationship health‚ and reflecting on social and legislative landscapes around sexual and reproductive freedom‚” featured 13 unique events for students to attend.The event was held from January 29 to February 1 and was highly promoted on the school’s Office of Student Activities Instagram account.  Libs of TikTok posted about the event on X‚ garnering over 300‚000 views and thousands of replies condemning the event.  One event was called “Genitalia Cookie Decorating‚" where attendees could decorate “genitalia-shaped cookies with frosting and candles.” Attendees could also color a “sex-positive coloring sheet.” Another event was a movie night of the film “Premature” about an adult's inappropriate relationship with a 17-year-old. The week also featured numerous different classes and lectures like “Exploring Sexuality Through Identity‚” “BDSM 101‚” and “Sex &; Politics.” The school also offered interactive events like “Sex Trivia‚” “Reproductive Health Tabling &; Trivia‚” and “Free STI Testing.” Saturday evening of SexCon featured a “Kinky Masquerade” where attendees could get “sensual boudoir dance lessons‚” watch performances‚ and even show off their “sexy outfits” on a red carpet. Attendees were encouraged to “wear base layers and bring a button-down‚ socks‚ and a blanket” if they were interested in taking the boudoir dance lessons. Remember this is catered towards college students‚ some of which very likely could be only 17-years-old.  Kalamazoo College was proud of the event and promoted it on their website.  “Sex Con‚ a dynamic week during Winter term at Kalamazoo College‚ champions sex education and empowerment. Through workshops‚ discussions‚ and expert-led sessions‚ it fosters a safe and inclusive environment‚ promoting healthy dialogues on consent‚ communication‚ and individual empowerment‚” the Special Programs section of the Student Activities page on the website read. In response to these events being hosted at a the school‚ users were furious.  “Teaching girls how to become strippers is now part of college education? I thought some people just did that to pay off their student loans‚” Rebel News’ Ian Miles Cheong wrote. “They’re obsessed with sex more than real problems. Goes to show what they worry about‚” one user wrote while another insisted it was “time to end all the indoctrination and grooming.”  “It certainly doesn’t make sense for any hardworking American to pay off the debt of someone who goes there. No wonder these graduates can’t find jobs when they take courses in such nonsense‚” one more user wrote. Related: ‘Dragging’ Kids Away from Normalcy: Groomers on the Go In the Libs of TikTok post‚ a video from the event showed a person in an orange bra and a thong giving another nearly naked individual a lap dance. “Biden wants to spend your tax money on relieving student debt for this?!” Libs of TikTok wrote in its caption. Y’all‚ this is what the Biden regime thinks is important for students to spend their time learning about. This is sick. Follow us on Twitter/X: Woke World Of Sports: Deadspin Complains Eric Bieniemy Not Being Hired Is Racist 70% of NFL players are black‚ but to the left‚ the NFL is still racist. pic.twitter.com/dD11YHIgfM — MRCTV (@mrctv) February 7‚ 2024  

After the vote to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas failed‚ host of CBS’s The Late Show‚ Stephen Colbert‚ and NBC’s Late Night host‚ Seth Meyers‚ took the time on Wednesday to celebrate and hail the “heroic return” and “dramatic” return of Democratic Rep. Al Green from the hospital that doomed the vote. Colbert recalled‚ “Republicans thought they could lose three of their votes and still win the impeachment vote. But they did not count on the heroic return of Texas Democratic Congressman and businessman werewolf‚ Al Green.”     Enjoying Republicans struggle‚ Colbert continued‚ “The GOP was counting on Green not showing up because he was in the hospital recovering from abdominal surgery. But he learned about the impeachment vote while watching television‚ so he grabbed an Uber to the Capitol. That takes a lot of guts‚ some of which might still be in the back of that Uber. Then he arrived on the floor of Congress still in a hospital gown with no shoes. Turns out‚ he was wearing one boot‚ but he left it in Mike Johnson's ass.” Over on NBC‚ Meyers reached for the WWE analogy‚ “Amazing‚ so basically‚ one surprise Democrat screwed the Republicans by showing up at the last minute‚ like Stone Cold Steve Austin interrupting a wrestling match. Although Democratic Congressman Al Green's entrance was actually more dramatic than Stone Cold's‚ as he was in the hospital recovering from emergency abdominal surgery last Friday and Republicans therefore assumed he wouldn't be present for the vote‚ but he was.” Meyers proceed to extensively quote the New York Times’s account of Green’s actions‚ including quotations from Green himself‚ “'I was determined to cast the vote long before I had no idea how close it was going to be‚' Mr. Green said in an interview on Tuesday' night from his hospital bed‚ where he had returned shortly after voting. I didn't come assuming that my vote was going to make a difference. I came because it was personal.'” Clearly‚ Meyers was a fan‚ “Whoa‚ ‘I came because it was personal‚’ delivered from a hospital bed after making a surprise last-minute appearance to cast a deciding vote is one hell of a line. I mean‚ who's gonna play Al Green in the movie about this? Schwarzenegger?” Meyers continued his adoration for Green by doing a Schwarzenegger impression‚ “Hello‚ my name is congressman Al Green from Texas. And I came because it is personal. Now I must return to my hospital bed. But just remember‚ like I always say‚ 'I‚ Al Green‚ will be back.' You know me for my tan socks.” Colbert and Meyers should get their laughs in now because Republicans may try again later and the border is still a mess. Here are transcripts for the February 7-taped shows: CBS The Late Show with Stephen Colbert 2/7/2024 11:40 PM ET STEPHEN COLBERT: Here's what happened. Republicans thought they could lose three of their votes and still win the impeachment vote. But they did not count on the heroic return of Texas Democratic Congressman and businessman werewolf‚ Al Green. The GOP was counting on Green not showing up because he was in the hospital recovering from abdominal surgery. But he learned about the impeachment vote while watching television‚ so he grabbed an Uber to the Capitol. That takes a lot of guts‚ some of which might still be in the back of that Uber. Then he arrived on the floor of Congress still in a hospital gown with no shoes. Turns out‚ he was wearing one boot‚ but he left it in Mike Johnson's ass.  *** NBC Late Night with Seth Meyers 2/8/2024 12:45 AM ET SETH MEYERS: Amazing‚ so basically‚ one surprise Democrat screwed the Republicans by showing up at the last minute‚ like Stone Cold Steve Austin interrupting a wrestling match. Although Democratic Congressman Al Green's entrance was actually more dramatic than Stone Cold's‚ as he was in the hospital recovering from emergency abdominal surgery last Friday and Republicans therefore assumed he wouldn't be present for the vote‚ but he was. Here's how it went down according to the New York Times.  "Three House Republicans had already cast votes against impeaching Mayorkas‚ and based on attendance at the previous vote‚ the GOP could afford no more. Then‚ like a scene out of a political thriller‚ Representative Al Green‚ Democrat of Texas‚ appeared at the last moment to cast a surprise ballot from a wheelchair‚ wearing blue hospital clothing and tan socks. He voted no. Mr. Green's vote was decisive. It tied up the measure‚ 215-215‚ and handed a stunning defeat to Speaker Mike Johnson. 'I was determined to cast the vote long before I had no idea how close it was going to be‚' Mr. Green said in an interview on Tuesday' night from his hospital bed‚ where he had returned shortly after voting. I didn't come assuming that my vote was going to make a difference. I came because it was personal.'  Whoa‚ "I came because it was personal‚" delivered from a hospital bed after making a surprise last-minute appearance to cast a deciding vote is one hell of a line. I mean‚ who's gonna play Al Green in the movie about this? Schwarzenegger? [SCHWARZENEGGER IMPRESSION] "Hello‚ my name is congressman Al Green from Texas. And I came because it is personal. Now I must return to my hospital bed. But just remember‚ like I always say‚ 'I‚ Al Green‚ will be back.' You know me for my tan socks. [NORMAL VOICE] You know‚ it's an impression that's so good that sometimes I will admit we force it  

With the U.S. Supreme Court set to hear arguments in the case of the Colorado Supreme Court ruling to remove former President Trump from the ballot for “insurrection” despite not being found guilty on Thursday‚ ABC’s Good Morning America was fearful that the conservative Supreme Court would side with Trump and “decide” the 2024 election like they supposedly did in 2000. Chief Washington Correspondent Jon Karl tried to quell their fears and hoped for a “unanimous” decision. “They're going to hear arguments about whether former President Trump can be banned from the ballot for his actions surrounding January 6th‚” announced former Clinton lackey George Stephanopoulos. Despite the fact that trials were still ongoing and Trump had yet to be found guilty of committing “insurrection” against the United States‚ Senior national correspondent and noted Trump hater‚ Terry Moran claimed that Trump not only did Trump “incite” the rioters but participated in the attack himself: Should Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election‚ including his participation in the attack on the Capitol‚ his incitement of that attack on January 6th‚ keep him off the 2024 presidential ballot? And this all comes down to one clause in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution passed right after the Civil War‚ which holds that no person who has previously taken an oath to support the Constitution and then engaged in insurrection can hold public office afterwards. “The Colorado Supreme Court‚ in the case brought by six voters there‚ took a look at that clause and ruled that Trump must be removed from the ballot in that state. In Maine‚ the secretary of state did the same thing. And other states are considering it‚ too‚” he hyped before weakly admitting that‚ “other states have rejected the idea.”     Following Moran’s report‚ Stephanopoulos invoked Bush v. Gore and claimed the Supreme Court “decided the 2000 election” and was the source of most of his fears in 2024. FACT CHECK: False. Multiple recounts‚ including one by the liberal Miami Herald‚ found that President George W. Bush did win Florida. Karl conceded that‚ on the surface‚ Stephanopoulos did have cause for concern since “this Supreme Court is a conservative court.” “Three Trump justices. It's a court that's been mired in some controversy‚” he added. But Karl attempted to quell his colleague's fear by noting times they ruled against Trump: But while it is a conservative court‚ this has not been a Trump court. In fact‚ this court has repeatedly ruled against Donald Trump or shown Independence from him. Think about it. Trump expected his justices‚ as he considered his justice‚ to help him overturn the election results. They rejected the efforts in that Texas case in December of 2020. The January 6th Committee wanted his White House records. Trump went all the way to the Supreme Court to try to block them from getting them. The Supreme Court ruled for the January 6th Committee. They even ruled prior to that to allow Congress to get his tax records. “So‚ the court has shown real independence from Trump‚” Karl reassured Stephanopoulos. “You know‚ looking at this‚ let's hope this decision is not one that breaks down on party lines.” Noting that there was still the case about whether or not presidents had absolute immunity‚ which Trump promised to take to SCOTUS‚ Karl proclaimed: “Two unanimous decisions would be nice.” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s Good Morning America February 8‚ 2024 7:02:32 a.m. Eastern GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: First‚ it’s a historic day at the Supreme Court. They're going to hear arguments about whether former President Trump can be banned from the ballot for his actions surrounding January 6th. Senior national correspondent Terry Moran is at the Supreme Court. Good morning‚ Terry. TERRY MORAN: Good morning‚ George. The justices will hear the arguments in this monument case‚ the biggest elections case since Bush vs. Gore back in 2000. The question: Should Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election‚ including his participation in the attack on the Capitol‚ his incitement of that attack on January 6th‚ keep him off the 2024 presidential ballot? And this all comes down to one clause in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution passed right after the Civil War‚ which holds that no person who has previously taken an oath to support the Constitution and then engaged in insurrection can hold public office afterwards. The Colorado Supreme Court‚ in the case brought by six voters there‚ took a look at that clause and ruled that Trump must be removed from the ballot in that state. In Maine‚ the secretary of state did the same thing. And other states are considering it‚ too. While still other states have rejected the idea. (…) 7:04:21 a.m. Eastern STEPHANOPOULOS: Terry brought up the Bush v. Gore case which decided the 2000 election. In some ways‚ this is far more consequential than that. JON KARL: This is a huge moment for the Supreme Court. It is a huge moment for the country. And look‚ George‚ this Supreme Court is a conservative court. Three Trump justices. It's a court that's been mired in some controversy. But while it is a conservative court‚ this has not been a Trump court. In fact‚ this court has repeatedly ruled against Donald Trump or shown Independence from him. Think about it. Trump expected his justices‚ as he considered his justice‚ to help him overturn the election results. They rejected the efforts in that Texas case in December of 2020. The January 6th Committee wanted his White House records. Trump went all the way to the Supreme Court to try to block them from getting them. The Supreme Court ruled for the January 6th Committee. They even ruled prior to that to allow Congress to get his tax records. So‚ the court has shown real independence from Trump. You know‚ looking at this‚ let's hope this decision is not one that breaks down on party lines. STEPHANOPOULOS: No question what you're saying is true. But this is also a court that is not going to be eager to appear to decide the 2024 election. KARL: I mean‚ absolutely not. And think about how long we saw the repercussions from the Bush v. Gore case‚ which was so controversial and made the court seen as so much more of a partisan body. And John Robert‚ Chief Justice Roberts‚ clearly made it clear that he wants the court to be not seen as yet not another political institution. He talks about how‚ you know‚ there aren't Trump justices or Bush justices or Obama justices. There are judges of the law. So‚ yes‚ he is not going to want to get mired in this. He's not the only one. So yes‚ Trump is going to try to go to the Supreme Court almost certainly. He said he's going to appeal the question of whether or not he has absolute immunity. So‚ you could have two cases central to this election‚ absolutely central to this election decided by this Supreme Court. STEPHANOPOULOS: See if they can come up with some kind of balancing there. KARL: I mean‚ two unanimous decisions would be nice.

As a controversial border security bill is held up in Congress‚ President Joe Biden is claiming he’s done all he can to keep the southern border secure‚ blaming Trump and Republicans in Congress for border woes ("I've done all I can do‚ just give me the power‚” etc.).  Yet even liberally slanted PolitiFact noted Biden used his executive powers to end President Trump’s "Remain in Mexico" program that required some asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while awaiting their U.S. hearings. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) claimed Biden doesn’t need new authority to decrease illegal border crossings and spelled out how on X. The PBS NewsHour has consistently ignored those facts to keep the scrutiny spotlight 100% upon Trump and congressional Republicans. Anchor Geoff Bennett on January 29 accused Trump of “trying to tank this agreement‚ urging the House speaker‚ Mike Johnson‚ not to support it.” After a clip showing Trump saying he found it “a very bad bill” that should be killed‚ Bennett responded. Geoff Bennett: So‚ [NPR’s Tamara Keith]‚ the politics of this are so transparent. I mean‚ it appears that for Donald Trump‚ the problem of immigration is more politically useful than an immigration solution. Being cynical about Republicans wanting "the issue" is permitted. Being cynical about the Democrats opening the border and liking massive immigration (for political reasons) is forbidden. On Monday’s NewsHour‚ anchor Amna Nawaz gushed along with the show’s “Politics Monday” duo of Amy Walter of The Cook Political Report and Tamara Keith of National Public Radio. Amna Nawaz: ….Amy‚ what this bill proposes is incredibly consequential‚ one of the biggest pieces of legislation for immigration in three decades in this country. The fact that the president was willing to go as far as he was‚ what does that say to you? Amy Walter‚ The Cook Political Report: ….we’ll really get a sense for whether or not‚ for example‚ if Republicans lose‚ this strategy of just blaming everything on Biden may not work. Nawaz also interviewed Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) on Monday‚ one of the senators who negotiated the bipartisan border bill‚ and gave a shout to radical-left members aggrieved accusation of extremism. Nawaz: You’ve faced some criticism from your fellow Democrats as well‚ progressives in particular. The caucus chair‚ Pramila Jayapal‚ said Democrats are giving in to extremist views. [!] She said President Biden and Senate Democrats have fallen into the same trap again. Are you worried that the bill could alienate your progressive base? On Tuesday‚ Nawaz lamented the bipartisan border bill may already be a goner because of conservative opposition and congressional reporter Lisa Desjardins could not see the logic: Lisa Desjardins: This is a real moment of logical disconnect. It does seem that the votes technically are there to open up debate on this bill‚ but when Senate Republicans met behind closed doors last night and today‚ they decided they would not support actually opening up this bill. There are a few reasons for that‚ and part of it has to do with the pressure on them over the border. A lot of it has to do with election-year politics. There is a debate still over the roots‚ of course‚ of the border crisis itself‚ but when it comes to the reasons that this bill offering a solution was pulled‚ Republicans today looked at each other and sort of blamed each other for it. Desjardins quoted the president. Joe Biden: All indications are this bill won't even move forward to the Senate floor. Why? A simple reason: Donald Trump. Because Donald Trump thinks it's bad for him politically. He'd rather weaponize this issue than actually solve it. Whatever Trump’s purely political aims may be‚ the actual sitting president can make moves to help secure the border. Biden simply prefers to blame Trump and the GOP during an election year‚ with the eager help of the mainstream media. These segments were brought to you in part by taxpayers like you. Transcripts are available‚ click “Expand.” PBS NewsHour 2/5/24 7:40:39 p.m. (ET) Amna Nawaz: Amy‚ what this bill proposes is incredibly consequential‚ one of the biggest pieces of legislation for immigration in three decades in this country. The fact that the president was willing to go as far as he was‚ what does that say to you? Amy Walter‚ The Cook Political Report: Well‚ I think it says that Democrats know‚ including the president‚ how problematic this issue is for their party going into an election year. What I find even more interesting‚ and it's going to be a really interesting test for the issue of immigration‚ is next week. There's a special election in a congressional district. This is George Santos' seat on Long Island. The issue of immigration‚ not surprisingly‚ is playing a starring role with the Democrat there taking a position that sounds very much like Joe Biden‚ talking about being able to have more border security‚ supporting this plan that just was released by the Senate. The Republican candidate and Republicans in general attacking the plan‚ she has not supported the plan‚ and attacking the Democrats‚ including this one‚ as being part of the open border party. In other words‚ by the time next Tuesday comes around‚ and by Wednesday‚ when we have the results of the election‚ we will have at least our first‚ our very first test for whether this issue and the way Democrats are talking about it‚ the way Republicans are talking about it‚ which side can claim some sort of political victory. Again‚ it's a special‚ so we can't draw too many conclusions‚ but we will really get a sense for whether or not‚ for example‚ if Republicans lose‚ this strategy of just blaming everything on Biden may not work. Tam‚ how are you looking at this? I mean‚ Republicans have probably their best shot at immigration reform. They have been clamoring for it for years. Tamara Keith: Right. Amna Nawaz: If this fails to go through because they're under pressure from President Trump‚ does that blow back on them from their base? Tamara Keith: Not from their base. I don't think it would blow back on them from their base. I mean‚ there is this argument that if this is the crisis they say it is‚ that it has to be dealt with right now — and this is an argument that you're hearing from people like James Lankford. If it has to be dealt with right now‚ then why wait until after the election? Why wait until‚ in theory‚ Trump is in office? And then you might still have a divided government‚ and you might not get this. So you're still — you're — at the best-case scenario‚ you're pushing this a year out‚ and worst-case scenario potentially way more gridlock. But Trump has made it abundantly clear that he does not want this. He was back out on the air today saying it's terrible‚ calling it amnesty‚ all of these things that it isn't. But it is a compromise. It is not the bill that former President Trump would want to sign. It's not the bill that the speaker of the House would author. But it is something that‚ in theory‚ if it actually could get to a floor vote‚ which it may not get in the Senate and it is even less likely to get in the House‚ it is something that could pass. It would be sort of a coalition of moderates and national security hawks‚ and it's a random coalition. You would lose all the people on the left and on the far right‚ but it could potentially pass. It may not get a chance to have that audition. PBS NewsHour 2/6/24 7:16:58 p.m. (ET) Amna Nawaz: The Senate border compromise unveiled fewer than 48 hours ago has already hit a legislative wall. Senate Republicans today announced they will block the long-negotiated proposal that would address the border crisis and provide aid to Ukraine and Israel. The bill drew sharp opposition from House Republicans‚ who spent much of today debating whether to impeach the homeland security secretary. Congressional correspondent Lisa Desjardins and our team have been working sources in both chambers. She joins us now live to report on where things stand. Lisa‚ this bill has not even been debated. The debate hasn't even begun over the border deal. Republicans are blocking it already. Why is that? And also how final is that block? Lisa Desjardins: This is a real moment of logical disconnect. It does seem that the votes technically are there to open up debate on this bill‚ but when Senate Republicans met behind closed doors last night and today‚ they decided they would not support actually opening up this bill. There are a few reasons for that‚ and part of it has to do with the pressure on them over the border. A lot of it has to do with election-year politics. There is a debate still over the roots‚ of course‚ of the border crisis itself‚ but when it comes to the reasons that this bill offering a solution was pulled‚ Republicans today looked at each other and sort of blamed each other for it. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI): We wanted to secure the border. That is why we are voting no. This does more harm than good‚ and that's not James Lankford's fault. That's Leader McConnell's fault. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY): Things have changed over the last four months‚ and it's been made perfectly clear by the speaker that he wouldn't take it up even if we sent it to him. And so I think that's probably why most of our members think we ought to have opposition. Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA): They did not send us a border security measure. They didn't. They sent us a supplemental funding proposal that has immigration reform‚ but not real border security reform‚ and so that's why it's a nonstarter. Lisa Desjardins: A waterfall of blame here‚ some blaming McConnell‚ some blaming the speaker‚ the speaker blaming the Senate. But‚ clearly‚ there is something else at work here. Democrats‚ for their part‚ including President Biden‚ say what happened is much more simple. Joe Biden‚ President of the United States: All indications are this bill won't even move forward to the Senate floor. Why? A simple reason: Donald Trump. Because Donald Trump thinks it's bad for him politically. He'd rather weaponize this issue than actually solve it. Lisa Desjardins: Now‚ there is not a plan B for either how to deal with the border crisis or for Ukraine funding. The House tonight may take a vote on a separate bill on Israel funding. That may not pass. So we're not clear what happens on any of these issues‚ if there can be progress on any of them in coming days or weeks. Amna Nawaz: Lisa‚ meanwhile‚ as we mentioned earlier‚ a rare vote planned in the House today to impeach the Department of Homeland Security secretary‚ Alejandro Mayorkas. Where does that stand? Lisa Desjardins: Amna‚ this is incredibly close. I am speaking to you at the exact second that we're waiting to see if House Republicans even bring up this vote. They have teed it up. This is the previous vote closing out now. They are expected to bring up this impeachment vote next. But I have to tell you‚ from my reporting Amna‚ I don't think House Republicans have the vote‚ the majority vote‚ to pass it. As we have said on this program‚ there is an incredibly narrow margin in the House for Republicans. They can lose only two members and pass things with only Republican votes. We know of at least two members who are against this. And‚ today‚ the National Fraternal Order of Police came out with a letter saying Alejandro Mayorkas in their view has actually helped things‚ that he is someone who respects law and order. Now those Republicans who want to impeach him say instead that Mayorkas has had a willful disregard for federal law. And‚ indeed‚ they say he lied to Congress as well. Mayorkas denies that. He says this is political. A real test for House Republicans in a major effort tonight. We should know in the next hour or so what happens.

A group of GOP lawmakers are calling on Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Department of Justice to “halt” any efforts disposing of criminal evidence of five innocent babies. The move comes just a few days after it became clear that the DOJ attempted to hide potential criminal evidence that’s part of an ongoing investigation regarding five baby bodies found at a Washington D.C. abortion clinic. In 2022‚ a group of pro-lifers happened upon the dead bodies of five preemie sized babies along with the remains of over 100 pulverized first-trimester babies. The “D.C. Five‚” as they’ve been called‚ look to have been victims of third trimester abortions or infanticide. Some of them were completely intact while others were ripped apart. On Monday The Daily Signal released a piece indicating that the DOJ knew that these babies were likely killed illegally but urged the D.C. Medical Examiner to dispose of their bodies anyway. While the babies are still part of ongoing investigation‚ it seems to make no sense that the DOJ would encourage this unless they were trying to cover up the fact that these babies were killed illegally which‚ at this point‚ wouldn't be too surprising given the past record of the DOJ siding with abortion. The group Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising (PAAU) who found the D.C. Five has been extremely vocal about this injustice and have repeatedly called on our government to do something. On Wednesday they even held a vigil for the babies outside of the D.C. Medical Examiner's office. Also on Wednesday‚ a group of 45 representatives signed a letter calling on the DOJ to “halt” any efforts to destroy those five babies bodies.  Spearheaded by Representative Pat Fallon (R-Texas)‚ the letter indicates that it looks like Partial-Birth Abortion Ban and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act were “both possibly violated‚ and that at least one child was likely a victim of a partial-birth abortion.”  The letter went on to say that even after two years‚ autopsies still haven't been performed and proper investigation hasn’t been done. “An investigation must be conducted on what happened in the Washington Surgi-Clinic to these children to determine if a crime was committed‚” the letter indicated.  Here’s how the letter concluded: We demand that you immediately halt plans to dispose of these children‚ as they may well be evidence of a crime‚” the lawmakers wrote in a Wednesday letter first obtained by The Daily Signal. “We further demand you stop stonewalling and finally conduct a thorough investigation into the deaths of these children to determine what truly happened‚ and to hold any lawbreakers or murderers accountable. At the end of this investigation‚ we encourage a respectful burial of the babies. Signees included representatives like Gary Palmer (R-Ala.)‚ Ronny Jackson (R-Texas)‚ and Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.).  In an exclusive conversation with The Daily Signal‚ Martin Cannon‚ who is representing the pro-life activists charged by the DOJ‚ indicated that if nothing is done soon to stop the DOJ from destroying this evidence‚ “they will dispose of the babies” very soon‚ possibly by the end of this week. Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ) said it best when he told The Washingon Examiner that “When they were alive‚ these babies deserved to be treated with respect and compassion. Now‚ after their violent slaughter‚ justice must be tenaciously pursued with a thorough investigation into the details surrounding their brutal deaths — no cover ups!” Ted Cruz echoed Smith’s words when he said: Destroying evidence is a grave threat to the rule of law‚ and it is another tragic chapter in the Biden DOJ’s sad history of having two justice systems. The Medical Examiner should reject the DOJ’s lawless order to destroy evidence and instead conduct a proper investigation into whether these late-term abortions violated the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act‚ or‚ at minimum‚ allow for an autopsy by an outside group.  It is heartbreaking to think about what these babies likely went through and it’s disturbing to realize that our very own Department of Justice seems to care more about covering up their brutal deaths to keep an abortion clinic in business rather than providing actual justice for these babies.