Mario Duarte

Veteran • Country before party/person • Demand truth, justice, fair elections, accountable governance • “Party-based politics are reductive & divisive.” - Me

[Mario Duarte @mdwings2]

Patriots don’t put “Patriot” in their online bios. They (we) don’t need to.

[KTLA @KTLA]

A man who witnessed an immigration raid at a Pacoima shopping plaza said he was forcefully removed from his car and taken into custody for simply filming the activity.
Details: https://t.co/LXM6zydWs3

[Mario Duarte @mdwings2]

KFF data indicates $50 billion in annual improper Medicaid payments, often labeled as fraud, but GAO clarifies these are not direct fraud measures, challenging claims that work requirements or immigration restrictions will fully address systemic waste.

[Mario Duarte @mdwings2]

Scott's tenure as CEO of Columbia/HCA, fined $1.7 billion in 1997 for Medicare fraud (U.S. Department of Justice), lends irony to his critique. A 2000 deposition revealed him invoking the Fifth Amendment 75 times, questioning his healthcare reform credibility.

[Rick Scott @SenRickScott]

People are leaving CA and NY in droves to live in the Sunshine State. Why? Because they’re tired of paying for illegal aliens and childless, able-bodied, working-age adults to have a free ride.

But we have a problem: the federal government’s broken Medicaid system still forces them and every red state to pay for it! We have to stop this so we can protect Medicaid for those who NEED IT, and we have a chance to do that in the Big Beautiful Bill.

[Mario Duarte @mdwings2]

Scott's support for the "Big Beautiful Bill" targeting Medicaid fraud is ironic, as a 2019 study in J. Health Politics, Policy & Law found for-profit healthcare systems like HCA, led by Scott, inflated costs, hinting at a conflict of interest.

[Mario Duarte @mdwings2]

@SenRickScott KFF data indicates $50 billion in annual improper Medicaid payments, often labeled as fraud, but GAO clarifies these are not direct fraud measures, challenging claims that work requirements or immigration restrictions will fully address systemic waste.

[Mario Duarte @mdwings2]

@SenRickScott Scott's support for the "Big Beautiful Bill" targeting Medicaid fraud is ironic, as a 2019 study in J. Health Politics, Policy & Law found for-profit healthcare systems like HCA, led by Scott, inflated costs, hinting at a conflict of interest.

[Mario Duarte @mdwings2]

@SenRickScott U.S. Census Bureau (2023) data shows FL's net out-migration at 510K, with 32% under 32 citing housing & jobs, contradicting claims of leaving high-tax states like CA for fiscal reasons.

[Mario Duarte @mdwings2]

@SenRickScott Scott's tenure as CEO of Columbia/HCA, fined $1.7 billion in 1997 for Medicare fraud (U.S. Department of Justice), lends irony to his critique. A 2000 deposition revealed him invoking the Fifth Amendment 75 times, questioning his healthcare reform credibility.

[Mario Duarte @mdwings2]

@ratlpolicy Have you ever been there?

[Mario Duarte @mdwings2]

The grape Flavor Aid is flowing thick and sweet on X tonight.

[Benny Johnson @bennyjohnson]

If you see this coming toward you, you’re probably already dead.

[Steve Herman @newsguyusa]

Update: More than a dozen VOA Farsi journalists who were emailed termination notices from Kari Lake on Friday have been ordered to return to work Monday. (They're still set to lose their jobs Sept. 1.) https://t.co/xFldDuL5VS
https://t.co/k0j45AeKVI

[Justin Amash @justinamash]

The Framers of the Constitution were clear that only Congress is empowered to commence offensive military hostilities. But there are people on the left and right who reject divided powers and fundamentally hate America. They’re working deliberately and methodically to destroy it.

[Justin Amash @justinamash]

Under the Constitution, under any AUMF still in existence, and, yes, under the War Powers Resolution of 1973—President Trump’s strikes against Iran are completely and unambiguously unlawful. Anyone telling you otherwise is either deeply misinformed or acting in bad faith.

[Justin Amash @justinamash]

One of the most frequently misrepresented federal statutes—often falsely used to justify unconstitutional presidential war powers—is the War Powers Resolution (or Act) (50 U.S.C. §§ 1541-1550).

If only more people would read it.

Contrary to what you may have heard about the War Powers Resolution, it does not allow the president to take military action for any reason for 60-90 days without congressional approval so long as the president notifies Congress within 48 hours.

Section 1541(c) of the War Powers Resolution states clearly:

"The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."

Of the three cited authorities, not one indicates a presidential power to take unilateral (without Congress's approval) offensive military action.

The first two authorities allow the president to take offensive military action but only with Congress's express approval (Article I of the Constitution grants Congress the exclusive power to declare war). The third authority allows the president to take defensive military action without Congress's approval in the event of a specific type of national emergency, a sudden unforeseen attack on the United States (happening too quickly for Congress to meet) necessitating immediate action to protect Americans.

It's for this last situation (or for situations in which the president introduces forces into hostilities unlawfully) that the War Powers Resolution provides for the oft-mentioned 48-hour report to Congress (§ 1543) and 60-day (up to 90-day) timeline (§ 1544). If there's an attack in progress on the United States (i.e., currently happening), we expect the president to respond swiftly to neutralize the attack and protect Americans—and then we will hold the president to account.

The Framers of the Constitution agreed at the debates in the federal convention of 1787 that the president should have the "power to repel sudden attacks" but not the power to otherwise introduce forces into hostilities without congressional approval.

The War Powers Resolution does not confer any new authority on the president to take offensive military action without congressional approval—nor could it under our Constitution. It instead checks the president when, as the Framers contemplated, the president introduces our Armed Forces into hostilities to repel a sudden attack.

[Timothy Snyder @TimothyDSnyder]

Five things to remember about war:

1. Many things reported with confidence in the first hours and days will turn out not to be true

2. Whatever they say, the people who start wars are often thinking chiefly about domestic politics

3. The rationale given for a war will change over time, such that actual success or failure in achieving a named objective is less relevant than one might think

4. Wars are unpredictable

5. Wars are easy to start and hard to stop

[Pedro L. Gonzalez @emeriticus]

I’m going to let you in on a secret about how MAGA media really works, and why everyone gets on the same message, from Charlie Kirk to Posobiec.

During the GOP primary, Kirk texted me to tell me he had been instructed to attack me because I had been critical of Don Jr. he didn’t want to, but he didn’t have a choice. None of them do. Everyone is kept in line through blackmail. Social. Financial. Political. They twist your arm until you dance the right way. No one in MAGA world is independent for this reason.

[Justin Amash @justinamash]

Pray for peace but make no mistake: President Trump’s strikes against Iran have put all Americans at risk, especially U.S. troops.

The Framers understood that a conflict, once begun, takes its own path. That’s why they insisted that no executive have the power to take us to war.

They wisely vested the power to declare war in Congress, the body closest to the people. To “declare war,” they made clear, was to “commence” hostilities. On his own, a president could do no more than “repel sudden attacks.”

We don’t know if or how this war will escalate, but we do know that we have arrogant, reckless, and shameful leaders in the White House and Congress. They—like many of the officials who came before them—have worked to subvert the system that built the freest, most prosperous country the world has ever known.

[Mario Duarte @mdwings2]

In America's recent past, people trusted the intelligence community's assessments, rightly or wrongly. Now, the POTUS contradicts the IC, and his base disdains expertise, creating a perfect storm for exploitation.

[Jacob Perry @RealJacobPerry]

You can think that Iran shouldn't have a nuclear program and also believe that the president doesn't have the unilateral authority to wage war. It's possible to have both ideals simultaneously